Refer to the exhibit. SVR-A in EPG-A/BD-A fails to reach SVR-B in EPG-B/BD-B. Which two conditions should be verified to analyze the traffic between the two EPGs? (Choose two.)

In Cisco ACI, communication between endpoints in different EPGs is governed by contracts. If SVR-A and SVR-B are in different EPGs (EPG-A and EPG-B), a contract must exist between them that permits the specific traffic flow (e.g., ICMP, HTTP) for communication to succeed.

Limit Endpoint Learning (also known as Unicast Routing) controls whether the Bridge Domain performs IP learning; disabling it would not directly prevent traffic, and it's generally enabled for IP routing.

For any endpoint to communicate within or across EPGs, it must first be learned by the ACI fabric. Verifying that SVR-B is learned as an endpoint in EPG-B from its connected leaf (Node-112) confirms the fabric is aware of the server's location and can properly forward traffic to it.

Whether EPG-A and EPG-B are excluded from a preferred group primarily affects contract enforcement within a VRF, not necessarily the fundamental ability of a contract to allow traffic.

While ARP flooding is necessary for endpoints to learn each other's MAC addresses within the same broadcast domain, this is an underlying mechanism; the primary issues for inter-EPG communication failure are typically contracts and endpoint learning.