Refer to the exhibit. A switch has IP Source Guard (IPSG) and port-security enabled on interface GigabitEthernet0/1. A host with IP 10.1.1.1 and MAC 00:1A:2B:3C:4D:5E is connected and tries to access a web server at 192.168.1.100. What will happen?
Exhibit
Refer to the exhibit. interface GigabitEthernet0/1 ip access-group ACL-IN in ip verify source port-security ! ip access-list extended ACL-IN permit tcp 10.0.0.0 0.255.255.255 any eq 80 permit tcp 10.0.0.0 0.255.255.255 any eq 443 deny ip any any
Trap 1: The traffic is blocked because the host is not using DHCP, so IPSG…
Incorrect. IPSG does not drop all non-DHCP traffic if a static binding is configured, but in this case no such binding exists.
Trap 2: The traffic is permitted only if the destination is also in the…
Incorrect. IPSG does not check the destination IP; it checks the source IP against bindings. Destination subnet is irrelevant.
Trap 3: The traffic is permitted because the host's IP is within the…
Incorrect. Port-security does not create an IPSG binding; without a valid IP-MAC binding, IPSG will drop the traffic even if the MAC is allowed.
- A
The traffic is blocked because the host is not using DHCP, so IPSG drops all non-DHCP traffic.
Why wrong: Incorrect. IPSG does not drop all non-DHCP traffic if a static binding is configured, but in this case no such binding exists.
- B
The traffic is permitted only if the destination is also in the 10.0.0.0/8 range.
Why wrong: Incorrect. IPSG does not check the destination IP; it checks the source IP against bindings. Destination subnet is irrelevant.
- C
The traffic is blocked because IP Source Guard requires a static binding for the host.
Correct. Without DHCP or a static IP-source binding, IPSG blocks the traffic.
- D
The traffic is permitted because the host's IP is within the allowed subnet and the MAC is valid according to port-security.
Why wrong: Incorrect. Port-security does not create an IPSG binding; without a valid IP-MAC binding, IPSG will drop the traffic even if the MAC is allowed.