In Huawei's CloudFabric solution, in the scenario where the Border Leaf and Service Leaf are separated, what are the correct descriptions of the following principles for traffic orchestration…

Question

Options

• AThe controller creates the corresponding tenant VRF and egress VRF on the Border Leaf based
• BThe route to the external network on the border leaf is delivered by the iMaster NCE-Fabric
• CThe controller creates the corresponding tenant VRF and egress VRF on the Service Leaf based
• DThe backhaul route from the external network to the tenant network needs to be configured by the

• A
  5% (2)
• B
  12% (5)
• C
  83% (34)

Explanation

In Huawei's CloudFabric with Border Leaf / Service Leaf separation, the iMaster NCE-Fabric controller creates the tenant VRF and egress VRF on the Service Leaf (C), because the Service Leaf is the point where tenant traffic is classified and policy is enforced before being handed off toward the Border Leaf - not on the Border Leaf itself, which is why A is wrong. The backhaul route from the external network back into the tenant network must be manually configured (D) - typically via static routes or BGP peering at the Border Leaf with the external router - because NCE-Fabric does not automatically inject those return routes into the external-facing domain, making B incorrect (NCE-Fabric does not deliver the external-network route to the Border Leaf; that connectivity is outside the controller's automation boundary). Option D's key insight is that the controller handles the internal overlay, but external-to-internal return paths require operator involvement at the network boundary.

Memory tip: Think "S for Software-controlled" - the Service Leaf gets its VRFs from the controller, while the Border Leaf is the Boundary where manual/BGP config takes over. The controller's authority stops at the border.

No community discussion yet for this question.