Cisco Certified Support Technician (CCST) Networking 100-150 Practice Test 26
Question 250
An incident reviewer analyzes this observation: At the fictional Beacon Arts School after a site connectivity report, the team observes: A technician is given 10.8.12.72/29 and assigns .79 to a printer, assuming every number in the block is usable. What is the MOST specific underlying cause?
- In the /29 block .72–.79, .72 is the network address and .79 is the directed broadcast.
- The RFC 1918 private range spans 172.16.0.0 through 172.31.255.255, including 172.20.14.8.
- 8.8.8.8 is publicly addressed while 192.168.1.10 belongs to private RFC 1918 space.
- Modern CIDR prefix length determines the actual subnet boundary rather than the historical address class label.
Explanation
Correct Answer
A:Correct. This mechanism fits the observed network symptom at the fictional Beacon Arts School: In the /29 block .72–.79, .72 is the network address and .79 is the directed broadcast. The corresponding remedy is “Assign the printer one of 10.8.12.73 through 10.8.12.78 instead.”. Confirmation: The printer uses a valid host IP and neither the network nor broadcast address is allocated to equipment.
Incorrect Answers
B:That cause belongs to a different case: A branch device has 172.20.14.8 but a technician labels it public because every 172.x.x.x address is public. The observed fictional Beacon Arts School condition is specifically explained by “In the /29 block .72–.79, .72 is the network address and .79 is the directed broadcast.”.
C:That cause belongs to a different case: A network drawing marks 8.8.8.8 and 192.168.1.10 as the same address-scope type for internet routing. The observed fictional Beacon Arts School condition is specifically explained by “In the /29 block .72–.79, .72 is the network address and .79 is the directed broadcast.”.
D:That cause belongs to a different case: A trainee is told an old Class C IPv4 label requires a /24 mask even though a configured interface explicitly uses /27. The observed fictional Beacon Arts School condition is specifically explained by “In the /29 block .72–.79, .72 is the network address and .79 is the directed broadcast.”.
Question 251
After an approved correction, the support team reviews: At the fictional Beacon Arts School after a site connectivity report, the team observes: A technician is given 10.8.12.72/29 and assigns .79 to a printer, assuming every number in the block is usable. The approved corrective action is: “Assign the printer one of 10.8.12.73 through 10.8.12.78 instead.” Which result BEST demonstrates success?
- The laptop later receives its intended LAN address and default gateway instead of only a 169.254.x.x value.
- The workstation reaches permitted internet services through the edge's public-side address without publishing a private route.
- The inventory marks the address as private and the network's internet egress uses an approved public address.
- The printer uses a valid host IP and neither the network nor broadcast address is allocated to equipment.
Explanation
Correct Answer
D:Correct. This is the required observable acceptance evidence for “Assign the printer one of 10.8.12.73 through 10.8.12.78 instead.” at the fictional Beacon Arts School. It demonstrates correction of the original cause: In the /29 block .72–.79, .72 is the network address and .79 is the directed broadcast.
Incorrect Answers
A:That result is evidence for a separate corrective action, “Investigate the DHCP or static configuration path before relying on the link-local address for routed access.”. It does not establish the intended outcome “The printer uses a valid host IP and neither the network nor broadcast address is allocated to equipment.” for the fictional Beacon Arts School case.
B:That result is evidence for a separate corrective action, “Keep the workstation on its private LAN and use approved address translation or a secure remote-access design at the edge.”. It does not establish the intended outcome “The printer uses a valid host IP and neither the network nor broadcast address is allocated to equipment.” for the fictional Beacon Arts School case.
C:That result is evidence for a separate corrective action, “Classify 10.42.7.18 as private and document its required edge NAT behavior.”. It does not establish the intended outcome “The printer uses a valid host IP and neither the network nor broadcast address is allocated to equipment.” for the fictional Beacon Arts School case.
Question 252
Before approving the action, review: At the fictional Beacon Arts School after a site connectivity report, the team observes: A technician is given 10.8.12.72/29 and assigns .79 to a printer, assuming every number in the block is usable. During “Assign the printer one of 10.8.12.73 through 10.8.12.78 instead.”, which precaution MOST specifically prevents a related risk?
- Do not troubleshoot IPv6 neighbor resolution solely by looking for IPv4 ARP messages.
- Do not insert multiple double-colon compressions into one IPv6 address.
- Do not use a subnet's directed broadcast address as a normal device interface address.
- Do not assume a 100.70.x.x WAN address is independently public and accepts inbound internet connections.
Explanation
Correct Answer
C:Correct. This precaution prevents a second fault while applying “Assign the printer one of 10.8.12.73 through 10.8.12.78 instead.” at the fictional Beacon Arts School. The required protection is “Do not use a subnet's directed broadcast address as a normal device interface address.”; success still requires “The printer uses a valid host IP and neither the network nor broadcast address is allocated to equipment.”.
Incorrect Answers
A:This caution is appropriate for a separate failure pattern: An engineer expects an IPv6 host to ARP for a neighbor's MAC address exactly as IPv4 does. The principal adjacent risk here is controlled by “Do not use a subnet's directed broadcast address as a normal device interface address.”.
B:This caution is appropriate for a separate failure pattern: A student expands 2001:db8::5 into an address with two separate :: compression markers and too many hextets. The principal adjacent risk here is controlled by “Do not use a subnet's directed broadcast address as a normal device interface address.”.
D:This caution is appropriate for a separate failure pattern: A guest Wi-Fi laptop shows 100.70.4.9 on the carrier-facing status page and the technician treats it as a customer-owned public IPv4 for inbound hosting. The principal adjacent risk here is controlled by “Do not use a subnet's directed broadcast address as a normal device interface address.”.
Question 253
A technician reviews the following issue: At the fictional Stonewater Manufacturing during its network support shift, the team observes: 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. Which action MOST directly resolves the reported issue?
- Distinguish public and private source scopes and identify the required boundary translation.
- Confirm the different /24 subnets and verify a correct default gateway or routing path.
- Keep 2001:db8:abcd:2::/64 in documentation and use a real assigned prefix for production.
- Expand 2001:db8::5 into eight hextets with the correct number of zero groups.
Explanation
Correct Answer
B:Correct. In the fictional Stonewater Manufacturing case, With a /24 mask their network prefixes are different and communication normally needs Layer 3 forwarding. The specified corrective action, “Confirm the different /24 subnets and verify a correct default gateway or routing path.”, directly targets that condition. Evidence of resolution: A route test shows traffic going through a router rather than direct same-subnet ARP.
Incorrect Answers
A:That action addresses a different network issue: A network drawing marks 8.8.8.8 and 192.168.1.10 as the same address-scope type for internet routing. The present fictional Stonewater Manufacturing finding instead needs “Confirm the different /24 subnets and verify a correct default gateway or routing path.”, verified by “A route test shows traffic going through a router rather than direct same-subnet ARP.”.
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 Stonewater Manufacturing finding instead needs “Confirm the different /24 subnets and verify a correct default gateway or routing path.”, verified by “A route test shows traffic going through a router rather than direct same-subnet ARP.”.
D:That action addresses a different network issue: A student expands 2001:db8::5 into an address with two separate :: compression markers and too many hextets. The present fictional Stonewater Manufacturing finding instead needs “Confirm the different /24 subnets and verify a correct default gateway or routing path.”, verified by “A route test shows traffic going through a router rather than direct same-subnet ARP.”.
Question 254
An incident reviewer analyzes this observation: At the fictional Stonewater Manufacturing during its network support shift, the team observes: 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. What is the MOST specific underlying cause?
- With a /24 mask their network prefixes are different and communication normally needs Layer 3 forwarding.
- ff00::/8 identifies IPv6 multicast addresses, and ff02::1 targets all nodes on the local link.
- The RFC 1918 private range spans 172.16.0.0 through 172.31.255.255, including 172.20.14.8.
- Public addressing requires a legitimately assigned routable prefix or translation, not only an outbound static route.
Explanation
Correct Answer
A:Correct. This mechanism fits the observed network symptom at the fictional Stonewater Manufacturing: With a /24 mask their network prefixes are different and communication normally needs Layer 3 forwarding. The corresponding remedy is “Confirm the different /24 subnets and verify a correct default gateway or routing path.”. Confirmation: A route test shows traffic going through a router rather than direct same-subnet ARP.
Incorrect Answers
B: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 Stonewater Manufacturing condition is specifically explained by “With a /24 mask their network prefixes are different and communication normally needs Layer 3 forwarding.”.
C:That cause belongs to a different case: A branch device has 172.20.14.8 but a technician labels it public because every 172.x.x.x address is public. The observed fictional Stonewater Manufacturing condition is specifically explained by “With a /24 mask their network prefixes are different and communication normally needs Layer 3 forwarding.”.
D:That cause belongs to a different case: A support analyst believes an internal 192.168.50.0/24 address can be made public solely by changing the router's default route. The observed fictional Stonewater Manufacturing condition is specifically explained by “With a /24 mask their network prefixes are different and communication normally needs Layer 3 forwarding.”.
Question 255
After an approved correction, the support team reviews: At the fictional Stonewater Manufacturing during its network support shift, the team observes: 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 approved corrective action is: “Confirm the different /24 subnets and verify a correct default gateway or routing path.” Which result BEST demonstrates success?
- Concurrent clients access internet services and the NAT table tracks distinct translated sessions.
- The laptop later receives its intended LAN address and default gateway instead of only a 169.254.x.x value.
- The capture shows IPv6 multicast delivery instead of a directed or limited broadcast packet.
- A route test shows traffic going through a router rather than direct same-subnet ARP.
Explanation
Correct Answer
D:Correct. This is the required observable acceptance evidence for “Confirm the different /24 subnets and verify a correct default gateway or routing path.” at the fictional Stonewater Manufacturing. It demonstrates correction of the original cause: With a /24 mask their network prefixes are different and communication normally needs Layer 3 forwarding.
Incorrect Answers
A:That result is evidence for a separate corrective action, “Configure an approved source NAT/PAT rule and verify outbound connection translations.”. It does not establish the intended outcome “A route test shows traffic going through a router rather than direct same-subnet ARP.” for the fictional Stonewater Manufacturing case.
B:That result is evidence for a separate corrective action, “Investigate the DHCP or static configuration path before relying on the link-local address for routed access.”. It does not establish the intended outcome “A route test shows traffic going through a router rather than direct same-subnet ARP.” for the fictional Stonewater Manufacturing case.
C:That result is evidence for a separate corrective action, “Identify the appropriate link-local IPv6 multicast group for the intended discovery or group message.”. It does not establish the intended outcome “A route test shows traffic going through a router rather than direct same-subnet ARP.” for the fictional Stonewater Manufacturing case.
Question 256
Before approving the action, review: At the fictional Stonewater Manufacturing during its network support shift, the team observes: 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. During “Confirm the different /24 subnets and verify a correct default gateway or routing path.”, which precaution MOST specifically prevents a related risk?
- Do not assign an ff02:: multicast address as an ordinary single-host unicast interface.
- Do not assume unique-local IPv6 prefixes are globally routed by internet providers.
- Do not decide that hosts share a subnet using only the first two IPv4 octets.
- Do not advertise a fe80:: link-local address as an ordinary global internet route.
Explanation
Correct Answer
C:Correct. This precaution prevents a second fault while applying “Confirm the different /24 subnets and verify a correct default gateway or routing path.” at the fictional Stonewater Manufacturing. The required protection is “Do not decide that hosts share a subnet using only the first two IPv4 octets.”; success still requires “A route test shows traffic going through a router rather than direct same-subnet ARP.”.
Incorrect Answers
A:This caution is appropriate for a separate failure pattern: A device sends a packet to ff02::1 and the support note calls it a single host's IPv6 unicast address. The principal adjacent risk here is controlled by “Do not decide that hosts share a subnet using only the first two IPv4 octets.”.
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 decide that hosts share a subnet using only the first two IPv4 octets.”.
D:This caution is appropriate for a separate failure pattern: A workstation shows fe80::7a4b on its IPv6 interface and a technician tries to route it as a globally reachable internet destination. The principal adjacent risk here is controlled by “Do not decide that hosts share a subnet using only the first two IPv4 octets.”.
Question 257
A technician reviews the following issue: At the fictional Sunrise Payment Office before a planned system change, the team observes: An admin converts /27 to a mask of 255.255.255.0 and allocates too many clients to a tiny segment. Which action MOST directly resolves the reported issue?
- Recognize the shared address scope and confirm carrier NAT or dedicated public access requirements.
- Apply 255.255.255.224 and recalculate the subnet's network and broadcast boundaries.
- Classify the fd34:5:6::10 address as ULA and distinguish it from global unicast.
- Use ::/0 with the appropriate IPv6 next hop in the IPv6 routing table.
Explanation
Correct Answer
B:Correct. In the fictional Sunrise Payment Office case, A /27 prefix corresponds to mask 255.255.255.224, yielding blocks of 32 addresses. The specified corrective action, “Apply 255.255.255.224 and recalculate the subnet's network and broadcast boundaries.”, directly targets that condition. Evidence of resolution: The subnet calculator and manual bitmask agree on the 32-address block size.
Incorrect Answers
A:That action addresses a different network issue: A guest Wi-Fi laptop shows 100.70.4.9 on the carrier-facing status page and the technician treats it as a customer-owned public IPv4 for inbound hosting. The present fictional Sunrise Payment Office finding instead needs “Apply 255.255.255.224 and recalculate the subnet's network and broadcast boundaries.”, verified by “The subnet calculator and manual bitmask agree on the 32-address block size.”.
C:That action addresses a different network issue: A student sees fd34:5:6::10 and labels it a global publicly reachable address merely because it is 128 bits long. The present fictional Sunrise Payment Office finding instead needs “Apply 255.255.255.224 and recalculate the subnet's network and broadcast boundaries.”, verified by “The subnet calculator and manual bitmask agree on the 32-address block size.”.
D:That action addresses a different network issue: A router carries an IPv6 default route and a trainee writes it as 0.0.0.0/0 in the IPv6 route table. The present fictional Sunrise Payment Office finding instead needs “Apply 255.255.255.224 and recalculate the subnet's network and broadcast boundaries.”, verified by “The subnet calculator and manual bitmask agree on the 32-address block size.”.
Question 258
An incident reviewer analyzes this observation: At the fictional Sunrise Payment Office before a planned system change, the team observes: An admin converts /27 to a mask of 255.255.255.0 and allocates too many clients to a tiny segment. What is the MOST specific underlying cause?
- A /27 prefix corresponds to mask 255.255.255.224, yielding blocks of 32 addresses.
- IPv6 uses Neighbor Discovery with ICMPv6 rather than the IPv4 ARP protocol.
- 2001:db8::/32 is reserved for documentation examples rather than publicly routed production allocation.
- ff00::/8 identifies IPv6 multicast addresses, and ff02::1 targets all nodes on the local link.
Explanation
Correct Answer
A:Correct. This mechanism fits the observed network symptom at the fictional Sunrise Payment Office: A /27 prefix corresponds to mask 255.255.255.224, yielding blocks of 32 addresses. The corresponding remedy is “Apply 255.255.255.224 and recalculate the subnet's network and broadcast boundaries.”. Confirmation: The subnet calculator and manual bitmask agree on the 32-address block size.
Incorrect Answers
B: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 Sunrise Payment Office condition is specifically explained by “A /27 prefix corresponds to mask 255.255.255.224, yielding blocks of 32 addresses.”.
C:That cause belongs to a different case: 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 observed fictional Sunrise Payment Office condition is specifically explained by “A /27 prefix corresponds to mask 255.255.255.224, yielding blocks of 32 addresses.”.
D: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 Sunrise Payment Office condition is specifically explained by “A /27 prefix corresponds to mask 255.255.255.224, yielding blocks of 32 addresses.”.
Question 259
After an approved correction, the support team reviews: At the fictional Sunrise Payment Office before a planned system change, the team observes: An admin converts /27 to a mask of 255.255.255.0 and allocates too many clients to a tiny segment. The approved corrective action is: “Apply 255.255.255.224 and recalculate the subnet's network and broadcast boundaries.” Which result BEST demonstrates success?
- The service plan explicitly documents whether inbound public reachability is available through the carrier.
- An external site sees the approved edge public source while the workstation retains its private address.
- The expanded address contains exactly eight 16-bit groups and round-trips to the short form.
- The subnet calculator and manual bitmask agree on the 32-address block size.
Explanation
Correct Answer
D:Correct. This is the required observable acceptance evidence for “Apply 255.255.255.224 and recalculate the subnet's network and broadcast boundaries.” at the fictional Sunrise Payment Office. It demonstrates correction of the original cause: A /27 prefix corresponds to mask 255.255.255.224, yielding blocks of 32 addresses.
Incorrect Answers
A:That result is evidence for a separate corrective action, “Recognize the shared address scope and confirm carrier NAT or dedicated public access requirements.”. It does not establish the intended outcome “The subnet calculator and manual bitmask agree on the 32-address block size.” for the fictional Sunrise Payment Office case.
B:That result is evidence for a separate corrective action, “Keep the private prefix internally and arrange approved NAT or public address allocation at the network edge.”. It does not establish the intended outcome “The subnet calculator and manual bitmask agree on the 32-address block size.” for the fictional Sunrise Payment Office case.
C:That result is evidence for a separate corrective action, “Expand 2001:db8::5 into eight hextets with the correct number of zero groups.”. It does not establish the intended outcome “The subnet calculator and manual bitmask agree on the 32-address block size.” for the fictional Sunrise Payment Office case.
Question 260
Before approving the action, review: At the fictional Sunrise Payment Office before a planned system change, the team observes: An admin converts /27 to a mask of 255.255.255.0 and allocates too many clients to a tiny segment. During “Apply 255.255.255.224 and recalculate the subnet's network and broadcast boundaries.”, which precaution MOST specifically prevents a related risk?
- Do not assume a 100.70.x.x WAN address is independently public and accepts inbound internet connections.
- Do not treat 2001:db8:: documentation space as a routable production IPv6 allocation.
- Do not use a /24 mask with a documented /27 prefix length.
- Do not advertise RFC 1918 workstation addresses as globally routable internet prefixes.
Explanation
Correct Answer
C:Correct. This precaution prevents a second fault while applying “Apply 255.255.255.224 and recalculate the subnet's network and broadcast boundaries.” at the fictional Sunrise Payment Office. The required protection is “Do not use a /24 mask with a documented /27 prefix length.”; success still requires “The subnet calculator and manual bitmask agree on the 32-address block size.”.
Incorrect Answers
A:This caution is appropriate for a separate failure pattern: A guest Wi-Fi laptop shows 100.70.4.9 on the carrier-facing status page and the technician treats it as a customer-owned public IPv4 for inbound hosting. The principal adjacent risk here is controlled by “Do not use a /24 mask with a documented /27 prefix length.”.
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 use a /24 mask with a documented /27 prefix length.”.
D:This caution is appropriate for a separate failure pattern: 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 principal adjacent risk here is controlled by “Do not use a /24 mask with a documented /27 prefix length.”.