352-001 · Question #766
Which design consideration is valid when you contrast fabricPath and trill?
The correct answer is B. FabricPath permits active-active FHRP and TRILL. Both FabricPath and TRILL support active-active FHRP configurations, making this the valid shared design consideration when contrasting the two technologies.
Question
Which design consideration is valid when you contrast fabricPath and trill?
Options
- AFabricPath uses IS-IS, but TRILL uses VxLAN
- BFabricPath permits active-active FHRP and TRILL
- CFabricPath Permits ECMP, but TRILL does not
- DFabricPath permits active-active mode, but TRILL supports only active-standby mode.
How the community answered
(20 responses)- B85% (17)
- C10% (2)
- D5% (1)
Why each option
Both FabricPath and TRILL support active-active FHRP configurations, making this the valid shared design consideration when contrasting the two technologies.
Both FabricPath and TRILL use IS-IS as their control plane routing protocol; VxLAN is a separate overlay encapsulation technology unrelated to TRILL's design.
Both FabricPath (Cisco's proprietary TRILL-based implementation) and standard TRILL support active-active FHRP, enabling all gateway devices to actively forward traffic simultaneously without STP-blocked ports. This active-active capability is a fundamental design advantage shared by both technologies and is a key reason enterprises deploy them over traditional spanning tree architectures.
Both FabricPath and TRILL support ECMP (Equal Cost Multi-Path) forwarding; neither technology restricts traffic to a single path as traditional STP does.
TRILL also supports active-active forwarding mode and is not limited to active-standby operation, so this statement incorrectly characterizes TRILL's capabilities.
Concept tested: FabricPath vs TRILL active-active FHRP design
Source: https://www.cisco.com/c/en/us/products/collateral/switches/nexus-5000-series-switches/white_paper_c11-687554.html
Topics
Community Discussion
No community discussion yet for this question.