4A0-107 · Question #63
Which of the following statements regarding the egress port scheduler is TRUE?
The correct answer is C. Multiple HQoS policies can be children of a single port scheduler. Option C is correct because in an HQoS hierarchy, the egress port scheduler functions as the root/top-level node, and multiple HQoS policies (schedulers) can be attached beneath it as children - this is the defining characteristic of hierarchical QoS architecture. Why the…
Question
Which of the following statements regarding the egress port scheduler is TRUE?
Options
- AThe egress port scheduler can have up to 17 children spread across 8 levels.
- BMultiple egress port schedulers can be assigned to a single port with many HQoS children.
- CMultiple HQoS policies can be children of a single port scheduler.
- DMultiple egress port schedulers can be children of a single HQoS scheduler.
How the community answered
(51 responses)- A4% (2)
- B2% (1)
- C92% (47)
- D2% (1)
Explanation
Option C is correct because in an HQoS hierarchy, the egress port scheduler functions as the root/top-level node, and multiple HQoS policies (schedulers) can be attached beneath it as children - this is the defining characteristic of hierarchical QoS architecture.
Why the distractors are wrong:
- A is wrong because the specific figures (17 children, 8 levels) don't accurately describe the egress port scheduler's constraints - these numbers are fabricated distractors.
- B reverses a key rule: only one egress port scheduler can be assigned to a single physical port; you cannot stack multiple port schedulers onto the same port.
- D inverts the hierarchy entirely - the port scheduler is the parent, not the child. HQoS schedulers sit beneath it, so a port scheduler cannot be a child of an HQoS scheduler.
Memory tip: Think of the port scheduler as a flagpole - there's exactly one per port (not multiple), and HQoS policies hang off it like multiple flags. The flagpole is always on top, never hanging off something else.
Topics
Community Discussion
No community discussion yet for this question.