An engineer is designing a high availability and failover solution for two Cisco Unified Border Element routers. The first router (cube 1.abc.com) takes 60% of the calls and the second router (cube2…

The SRV record format is _service._proto.name TTL class SRV priority weight port target. For cube1.abc.com taking 60% of calls, the correct SRV record is _sip_udp.abc.com 60 IN SRV 1 60 cube1.abc.com. Here, '1' is the priority (lower is preferred), and '60' is the weight, correctly assigning 60% of traffic.

Similarly, for cube2.abc.com taking 40% of calls, the correct SRV record is _sip_udp.abc.com 60 IN SRV 1 40 cube2.abc.com. Both records have the same priority '1' to allow load balancing, and '40' is the weight, ensuring 40% of traffic is directed here.

This choice has the priority and weight fields swapped, which is incorrect for SRV record syntax.

While the priority and weight are in the correct positions, this option only provides one part of the load-balancing pair, and another record is needed to complete the 60/40 split.

This choice has the correct syntax for priority and weight, but assigns a weight of 60 to cube2, which contradicts the problem statement of 40% for cube2.