After a subordinate switch requests a domain ID form a principal switch, the requested domain ID becomes the runtime domain ID, and all interfaces on the affected VSAN are isolated. What is a…

Question

Options

• AAdd the received ID to the allowed list.
• BConfigure a static domain on the subordinate switch and reboot the switch.
• CEnable the FICON feature on the affected VSAN.
• DConfigure IVR NAT on the affected VSAN.

• A
  78% (14)
• B
  6% (1)
• C
  6% (1)
• D
  11% (2)

Explanation

Option A is correct because the isolation occurs when the domain ID assigned by the principal switch falls outside the subordinate switch's allowed domain ID list - the switch rejects the ID it can't accept and isolates its interfaces. Adding the received domain ID to the allowed list permits the subordinate to accept the principal's assignment, restoring fabric communication on that VSAN.

Option B is wrong because configuring a static domain ID addresses a different problem (forcing a specific ID rather than accepting what's assigned) and rebooting doesn't fix an allowed-list mismatch. Option C is wrong because FICON is a mainframe-connectivity feature and has no bearing on domain ID negotiation. Option D is wrong because IVR NAT resolves communication between VSANs, not domain ID conflicts within a single VSAN.

Memory tip: Think "the principal gave it an ID, but the subordinate won't accept it - expand the guest list (allowed list)." Isolation due to a received-but-rejected domain ID always points to a missing entry in the allowed domain list.

No community discussion yet for this question.