Cisco Certified Support Technician (CCST) Networking 100-150 Practice Test 21
Question 200
The technician plans a correction for: At the fictional Crescent Community Center during a physical cabling audit, the team observes: A support technician thinks HTTPS uses UDP 53 because a website name is resolved with DNS before the connection. During “Trace the DNS query followed by the web TLS connection to the resolved server.”, which precaution MOST specifically prevents a related risk?
- Do not leave customer-managed guest operating systems unpatched under an IaaS assumption.
- Do not equate remote-work access with SaaS hosting.
- Do not use the DNS service port as the destination port for an HTTPS request.
- Do not call every Ethernet segment a WAN merely because it uses an IP address.
Explanation
Correct Answer
C:Correct. This precaution prevents a second fault while applying “Trace the DNS query followed by the web TLS connection to the resolved server.” at the fictional Crescent Community Center. The required protection is “Do not use the DNS service port as the destination port for an HTTPS request.”; success still requires “A capture shows name resolution traffic and subsequent HTTPS TCP traffic as distinct exchanges.”.
Incorrect Answers
A:This caution is appropriate for a separate failure pattern: A team rents cloud virtual machines and believes the provider must configure every guest OS account and application patch. The principal adjacent risk here is controlled by “Do not use the DNS service port as the destination port for an HTTPS request.”.
B:This caution is appropriate for a separate failure pattern: A freelancer works from home through a VPN to an internal application and the team assumes a VPN automatically makes it a cloud-hosted application. The principal adjacent risk here is controlled by “Do not use the DNS service port as the destination port for an HTTPS request.”.
D:This caution is appropriate for a separate failure pattern: A small office connects printers and PCs through one local switch but the diagram labels the network a transcontinental WAN. The principal adjacent risk here is controlled by “Do not use the DNS service port as the destination port for an HTTPS request.”.
Question 201
A technician reviews the following issue: At the fictional Silverleaf Clinic after a user reports a recurring problem, the team observes: A small-office PC uses 192.168.40.17 and a trainee proposes advertising it as a directly reachable address on the public internet. Which action MOST directly resolves the reported issue?
- Confirm the different /24 subnets and verify a correct default gateway or routing path.
- Keep the workstation on its private LAN and use approved address translation or a secure remote-access design at the edge.
- Keep 2001:db8:abcd:2::/64 in documentation and use a real assigned prefix for production.
- Determine the network as 172.16.8.0 and broadcast as 172.16.9.255.
Explanation
Correct Answer
B:Correct. In the fictional Silverleaf Clinic case, The 192.168.0.0/16 block is RFC 1918 private addressing and is not routed as an ordinary public destination. The specified corrective action, “Keep the workstation on its private LAN and use approved address translation or a secure remote-access design at the edge.”, directly targets that condition. Evidence of resolution: The workstation reaches permitted internet services through the edge's public-side address without publishing a private route.
Incorrect Answers
A:That action addresses a different network issue: Two laptops use 192.168.2.20/24 and 192.168.3.20/24; the technician treats them as directly on-link because both addresses begin 192.168. The present fictional Silverleaf Clinic finding instead needs “Keep the workstation on its private LAN and use approved address translation or a secure remote-access design at the edge.”, verified by “The workstation reaches permitted internet services through the edge's public-side address without publishing a private route.”.
C:That action addresses a different network issue: An IPv6 endpoint is configured with 2001:db8:abcd:2::9/64 for a lab and the technician expects it to be a publicly assigned production Internet prefix. The present fictional Silverleaf Clinic finding instead needs “Keep the workstation on its private LAN and use approved address translation or a secure remote-access design at the edge.”, verified by “The workstation reaches permitted internet services through the edge's public-side address without publishing a private route.”.
D:That action addresses a different network issue: A workstation is configured as 172.16.9.34/23 but the operator assumes 172.16.9.0 is the network ID. The present fictional Silverleaf Clinic finding instead needs “Keep the workstation on its private LAN and use approved address translation or a secure remote-access design at the edge.”, verified by “The workstation reaches permitted internet services through the edge's public-side address without publishing a private route.”.
Question 202
An incident reviewer analyzes this observation: At the fictional Silverleaf Clinic after a user reports a recurring problem, the team observes: A small-office PC uses 192.168.40.17 and a trainee proposes advertising it as a directly reachable address on the public internet. What is the MOST specific underlying cause?
- The 192.168.0.0/16 block is RFC 1918 private addressing and is not routed as an ordinary public destination.
- IPv6 addresses are 128 bits, and /64 identifies 64 network-prefix bits leaving 64 interface-identifier bits.
- IPv6 ::1 is loopback on the local host rather than a remote default gateway.
- IPv6's default route is ::/0, distinct from the IPv4 default 0.0.0.0/0.
Explanation
Correct Answer
A:Correct. This mechanism fits the observed network symptom at the fictional Silverleaf Clinic: The 192.168.0.0/16 block is RFC 1918 private addressing and is not routed as an ordinary public destination. The corresponding remedy is “Keep the workstation on its private LAN and use approved address translation or a secure remote-access design at the edge.”. Confirmation: The workstation reaches permitted internet services through the edge's public-side address without publishing a private route.
Incorrect Answers
B:That cause belongs to a different case: A technician assumes an IPv6 /64 has a 64-bit address in total rather than a 128-bit address with a 64-bit prefix. The observed fictional Silverleaf Clinic condition is specifically explained by “The 192.168.0.0/16 block is RFC 1918 private addressing and is not routed as an ordinary public destination.”.
C:That cause belongs to a different case: An IPv6 client has ::1 and the engineer tries to use it as the next-hop router address. The observed fictional Silverleaf Clinic condition is specifically explained by “The 192.168.0.0/16 block is RFC 1918 private addressing and is not routed as an ordinary public destination.”.
D:That cause belongs to a different case: A router carries an IPv6 default route and a trainee writes it as 0.0.0.0/0 in the IPv6 route table. The observed fictional Silverleaf Clinic condition is specifically explained by “The 192.168.0.0/16 block is RFC 1918 private addressing and is not routed as an ordinary public destination.”.
Question 203
After an approved correction, the support team reviews: At the fictional Silverleaf Clinic after a user reports a recurring problem, the team observes: A small-office PC uses 192.168.40.17 and a trainee proposes advertising it as a directly reachable address on the public internet. The approved corrective action is: “Keep the workstation on its private LAN and use approved address translation or a secure remote-access design at the edge.” Which result BEST demonstrates success?
- The capacity calculation shows 64 total addresses, 62 usable host addresses, and the reserved endpoints.
- The link-local address remains local while the global address reaches a remote IPv6 host.
- The annotation correctly allocates 64 bits to each part of the 128-bit address.
- The workstation reaches permitted internet services through the edge's public-side address without publishing a private route.
Explanation
Correct Answer
D:Correct. This is the required observable acceptance evidence for “Keep the workstation on its private LAN and use approved address translation or a secure remote-access design at the edge.” at the fictional Silverleaf Clinic. It demonstrates correction of the original cause: The 192.168.0.0/16 block is RFC 1918 private addressing and is not routed as an ordinary public destination.
Incorrect Answers
A:That result is evidence for a separate corrective action, “Select a /26 block for a conventional single-subnet requirement of at least 50 hosts.”. It does not establish the intended outcome “The workstation reaches permitted internet services through the edge's public-side address without publishing a private route.” for the fictional Silverleaf Clinic case.
B:That result is evidence for a separate corrective action, “Use an assigned global unicast or properly routed address for off-link communication.”. It does not establish the intended outcome “The workstation reaches permitted internet services through the edge's public-side address without publishing a private route.” for the fictional Silverleaf Clinic case.
C:That result is evidence for a separate corrective action, “Explain the /64 split between network prefix and interface identifier for the example subnet.”. It does not establish the intended outcome “The workstation reaches permitted internet services through the edge's public-side address without publishing a private route.” for the fictional Silverleaf Clinic case.
Question 204
Before approving the action, review: At the fictional Silverleaf Clinic after a user reports a recurring problem, the team observes: A small-office PC uses 192.168.40.17 and a trainee proposes advertising it as a directly reachable address on the public internet. During “Keep the workstation on its private LAN and use approved address translation or a secure remote-access design at the edge.”, which precaution MOST specifically prevents a related risk?
- Do not use the broader /24 network address when the configured interface is /25.
- Do not assume unique-local IPv6 prefixes are globally routed by internet providers.
- Do not advertise RFC 1918 workstation addresses as globally routable internet prefixes.
- Do not use a subnet's directed broadcast address as a normal device interface address.
Explanation
Correct Answer
C:Correct. This precaution prevents a second fault while applying “Keep the workstation on its private LAN and use approved address translation or a secure remote-access design at the edge.” at the fictional Silverleaf Clinic. The required protection is “Do not advertise RFC 1918 workstation addresses as globally routable internet prefixes.”; success still requires “The workstation reaches permitted internet services through the edge's public-side address without publishing a private route.”.
Incorrect Answers
A:This caution is appropriate for a separate failure pattern: A workstation uses 192.168.10.130/25 and the help desk claims its subnet network address is 192.168.10.0. The principal adjacent risk here is controlled by “Do not advertise RFC 1918 workstation addresses as globally routable internet prefixes.”.
B:This caution is appropriate for a separate failure pattern: A student sees fd34:5:6::10 and labels it a global publicly reachable address merely because it is 128 bits long. The principal adjacent risk here is controlled by “Do not advertise RFC 1918 workstation addresses as globally routable internet prefixes.”.
D:This caution is appropriate for a separate failure pattern: A technician is given 10.8.12.72/29 and assigns .79 to a printer, assuming every number in the block is usable. The principal adjacent risk here is controlled by “Do not advertise RFC 1918 workstation addresses as globally routable internet prefixes.”.
Question 205
A technician reviews the following issue: At the fictional Rivergate Branch during a physical cabling audit, the team observes: An administrator sees 10.42.7.18 in a lab and calls it a globally assigned public IPv4 address because its first octet is small. Which action MOST directly resolves the reported issue?
- Assign the printer one of 10.8.12.73 through 10.8.12.78 instead.
- Classify 10.42.7.18 as private and document its required edge NAT behavior.
- Keep 2001:db8:abcd:2::/64 in documentation and use a real assigned prefix for production.
- Configure a reachable next-hop address and keep ::1 for local IPv6 loopback tests.
Explanation
Correct Answer
B:Correct. In the fictional Rivergate Branch case, 10.0.0.0/8 is the private IPv4 block regardless of the apparent decimal value of its octets. The specified corrective action, “Classify 10.42.7.18 as private and document its required edge NAT behavior.”, directly targets that condition. Evidence of resolution: The inventory marks the address as private and the network's internet egress uses an approved public address.
Incorrect Answers
A:That action addresses a different network issue: A technician is given 10.8.12.72/29 and assigns .79 to a printer, assuming every number in the block is usable. The present fictional Rivergate Branch finding instead needs “Classify 10.42.7.18 as private and document its required edge NAT behavior.”, verified by “The inventory marks the address as private and the network's internet egress uses an approved public address.”.
C:That action addresses a different network issue: An IPv6 endpoint is configured with 2001:db8:abcd:2::9/64 for a lab and the technician expects it to be a publicly assigned production Internet prefix. The present fictional Rivergate Branch finding instead needs “Classify 10.42.7.18 as private and document its required edge NAT behavior.”, verified by “The inventory marks the address as private and the network's internet egress uses an approved public address.”.
D:That action addresses a different network issue: An IPv6 client has ::1 and the engineer tries to use it as the next-hop router address. The present fictional Rivergate Branch finding instead needs “Classify 10.42.7.18 as private and document its required edge NAT behavior.”, verified by “The inventory marks the address as private and the network's internet egress uses an approved public address.”.
Question 206
An incident reviewer analyzes this observation: At the fictional Rivergate Branch during a physical cabling audit, the team observes: An administrator sees 10.42.7.18 in a lab and calls it a globally assigned public IPv4 address because its first octet is small. What is the MOST specific underlying cause?
- 10.0.0.0/8 is the private IPv4 block regardless of the apparent decimal value of its octets.
- IPv6 fc00::/7 designates unique-local addressing, commonly represented by fd00::/8 prefixes.
- ff00::/8 identifies IPv6 multicast addresses, and ff02::1 targets all nodes on the local link.
- IPv6 uses Neighbor Discovery with ICMPv6 rather than the IPv4 ARP protocol.
Explanation
Correct Answer
A:Correct. This mechanism fits the observed network symptom at the fictional Rivergate Branch: 10.0.0.0/8 is the private IPv4 block regardless of the apparent decimal value of its octets. The corresponding remedy is “Classify 10.42.7.18 as private and document its required edge NAT behavior.”. Confirmation: The inventory marks the address as private and the network's internet egress uses an approved public address.
Incorrect Answers
B:That cause belongs to a different case: A student sees fd34:5:6::10 and labels it a global publicly reachable address merely because it is 128 bits long. The observed fictional Rivergate Branch condition is specifically explained by “10.0.0.0/8 is the private IPv4 block regardless of the apparent decimal value of its octets.”.
C:That cause belongs to a different case: A device sends a packet to ff02::1 and the support note calls it a single host's IPv6 unicast address. The observed fictional Rivergate Branch condition is specifically explained by “10.0.0.0/8 is the private IPv4 block regardless of the apparent decimal value of its octets.”.
D:That cause belongs to a different case: An engineer expects an IPv6 host to ARP for a neighbor's MAC address exactly as IPv4 does. The observed fictional Rivergate Branch condition is specifically explained by “10.0.0.0/8 is the private IPv4 block regardless of the apparent decimal value of its octets.”.
Question 207
After an approved correction, the support team reviews: At the fictional Rivergate Branch during a physical cabling audit, the team observes: An administrator sees 10.42.7.18 in a lab and calls it a globally assigned public IPv4 address because its first octet is small. The approved corrective action is: “Classify 10.42.7.18 as private and document its required edge NAT behavior.” Which result BEST demonstrates success?
- The capacity calculation shows 64 total addresses, 62 usable host addresses, and the reserved endpoints.
- The design uses ULA internally and chooses an appropriate global prefix for internet reachability.
- The production IPv6 interface uses an authorized prefix and examples retain the documentation address.
- The inventory marks the address as private and the network's internet egress uses an approved public address.
Explanation
Correct Answer
D:Correct. This is the required observable acceptance evidence for “Classify 10.42.7.18 as private and document its required edge NAT behavior.” at the fictional Rivergate Branch. It demonstrates correction of the original cause: 10.0.0.0/8 is the private IPv4 block regardless of the apparent decimal value of its octets.
Incorrect Answers
A:That result is evidence for a separate corrective action, “Select a /26 block for a conventional single-subnet requirement of at least 50 hosts.”. It does not establish the intended outcome “The inventory marks the address as private and the network's internet egress uses an approved public address.” for the fictional Rivergate Branch case.
B:That result is evidence for a separate corrective action, “Classify the fd34:5:6::10 address as ULA and distinguish it from global unicast.”. It does not establish the intended outcome “The inventory marks the address as private and the network's internet egress uses an approved public address.” for the fictional Rivergate Branch case.
C:That result is evidence for a separate corrective action, “Keep 2001:db8:abcd:2::/64 in documentation and use a real assigned prefix for production.”. It does not establish the intended outcome “The inventory marks the address as private and the network's internet egress uses an approved public address.” for the fictional Rivergate Branch case.
Question 208
Before approving the action, review: At the fictional Rivergate Branch during a physical cabling audit, the team observes: An administrator sees 10.42.7.18 in a lab and calls it a globally assigned public IPv4 address because its first octet is small. During “Classify 10.42.7.18 as private and document its required edge NAT behavior.”, which precaution MOST specifically prevents a related risk?
- Do not use a subnet's directed broadcast address as a normal device interface address.
- Do not treat 2001:db8:: documentation space as a routable production IPv6 allocation.
- Do not decide global routability by sorting the first IPv4 octet numerically.
- Do not set ::1 as the next-hop address for another network device.
Explanation
Correct Answer
C:Correct. This precaution prevents a second fault while applying “Classify 10.42.7.18 as private and document its required edge NAT behavior.” at the fictional Rivergate Branch. The required protection is “Do not decide global routability by sorting the first IPv4 octet numerically.”; success still requires “The inventory marks the address as private and the network's internet egress uses an approved public address.”.
Incorrect Answers
A:This caution is appropriate for a separate failure pattern: A technician is given 10.8.12.72/29 and assigns .79 to a printer, assuming every number in the block is usable. The principal adjacent risk here is controlled by “Do not decide global routability by sorting the first IPv4 octet numerically.”.
B:This caution is appropriate for a separate failure pattern: An IPv6 endpoint is configured with 2001:db8:abcd:2::9/64 for a lab and the technician expects it to be a publicly assigned production Internet prefix. The principal adjacent risk here is controlled by “Do not decide global routability by sorting the first IPv4 octet numerically.”.
D:This caution is appropriate for a separate failure pattern: An IPv6 client has ::1 and the engineer tries to use it as the next-hop router address. The principal adjacent risk here is controlled by “Do not decide global routability by sorting the first IPv4 octet numerically.”.
Question 209
A technician reviews the following issue: At the fictional Lakebridge Travel Office during a scheduled lab validation, the team observes: A branch device has 172.20.14.8 but a technician labels it public because every 172.x.x.x address is public. Which action MOST directly resolves the reported issue?
- Design an appropriate /30 segment when exactly two traditional IPv4 host addresses are needed.
- Apply the correct 172.16.0.0/12 private address boundary to the branch inventory.
- Assign the printer one of 10.8.12.73 through 10.8.12.78 instead.
- Check neighbor solicitation and advertisement traffic for the IPv6 peer on the local link.
Explanation
Correct Answer
B:Correct. In the fictional Lakebridge Travel Office case, The RFC 1918 private range spans 172.16.0.0 through 172.31.255.255, including 172.20.14.8. The specified corrective action, “Apply the correct 172.16.0.0/12 private address boundary to the branch inventory.”, directly targets that condition. Evidence of resolution: The classification distinguishes private 172.20.14.8 from an address such as 172.40.14.8.
Incorrect Answers
A:That action addresses a different network issue: A branch requires two usable addresses for a point-to-point IPv4 link and selects /29 without considering the simpler conventional /30. The present fictional Lakebridge Travel Office finding instead needs “Apply the correct 172.16.0.0/12 private address boundary to the branch inventory.”, verified by “The classification distinguishes private 172.20.14.8 from an address such as 172.40.14.8.”.
C:That action addresses a different network issue: A technician is given 10.8.12.72/29 and assigns .79 to a printer, assuming every number in the block is usable. The present fictional Lakebridge Travel Office finding instead needs “Apply the correct 172.16.0.0/12 private address boundary to the branch inventory.”, verified by “The classification distinguishes private 172.20.14.8 from an address such as 172.40.14.8.”.
D:That action addresses a different network issue: An engineer expects an IPv6 host to ARP for a neighbor's MAC address exactly as IPv4 does. The present fictional Lakebridge Travel Office finding instead needs “Apply the correct 172.16.0.0/12 private address boundary to the branch inventory.”, verified by “The classification distinguishes private 172.20.14.8 from an address such as 172.40.14.8.”.
Question 210
An incident reviewer analyzes this observation: At the fictional Lakebridge Travel Office during a scheduled lab validation, the team observes: A branch device has 172.20.14.8 but a technician labels it public because every 172.x.x.x address is public. What is the MOST specific underlying cause?
- The RFC 1918 private range spans 172.16.0.0 through 172.31.255.255, including 172.20.14.8.
- IPv6 does not use IPv4-style broadcast; multicast serves applicable group communication roles.
- IPv6 uses Neighbor Discovery with ICMPv6 rather than the IPv4 ARP protocol.
- For 192.168.40.0/24, .0 is the network ID, .255 is the directed broadcast, and .1 is a valid host.
Explanation
Correct Answer
A:Correct. This mechanism fits the observed network symptom at the fictional Lakebridge Travel Office: The RFC 1918 private range spans 172.16.0.0 through 172.31.255.255, including 172.20.14.8. The corresponding remedy is “Apply the correct 172.16.0.0/12 private address boundary to the branch inventory.”. Confirmation: The classification distinguishes private 172.20.14.8 from an address such as 172.40.14.8.
Incorrect Answers
B:That cause belongs to a different case: A technician expects IPv6 to send a subnet-wide broadcast address like 192.168.1.255 when contacting all local nodes. The observed fictional Lakebridge Travel Office condition is specifically explained by “The RFC 1918 private range spans 172.16.0.0 through 172.31.255.255, including 172.20.14.8.”.
C:That cause belongs to a different case: An engineer expects an IPv6 host to ARP for a neighbor's MAC address exactly as IPv4 does. The observed fictional Lakebridge Travel Office condition is specifically explained by “The RFC 1918 private range spans 172.16.0.0 through 172.31.255.255, including 172.20.14.8.”.
D:That cause belongs to a different case: A LAN router's 192.168.40.1/24 interface is documented as the segment broadcast destination rather than a valid host. The observed fictional Lakebridge Travel Office condition is specifically explained by “The RFC 1918 private range spans 172.16.0.0 through 172.31.255.255, including 172.20.14.8.”.