N10-009 · Question #186
A network administrator is configuring a new switch and wants to connect two ports to the core switch to ensure redundancy. Which of the following configurations would meet this requirement?
The correct answer is D. Link aggregation. To connect two ports to a core switch for both redundancy and increased bandwidth, link aggregation (LAG) is the appropriate configuration as it bundles multiple physical links into a single logical link.
Question
A network administrator is configuring a new switch and wants to connect two ports to the core switch to ensure redundancy. Which of the following configurations would meet this requirement?
Options
- AFull duplex
- B802.1Q tagging
- CNative VLAN
- DLink aggregation
How the community answered
(42 responses)- A2% (1)
- B14% (6)
- C7% (3)
- D76% (32)
Why each option
To connect two ports to a core switch for both redundancy and increased bandwidth, link aggregation (LAG) is the appropriate configuration as it bundles multiple physical links into a single logical link.
Full duplex is a standard configuration for Ethernet links allowing simultaneous two-way communication, but it does not provide redundancy by itself for multiple links.
802.1Q tagging is used for VLAN trunking, allowing multiple VLANs to traverse a single link, and does not inherently provide link redundancy or bandwidth aggregation.
Native VLAN refers to the untagged VLAN on a trunk port and is not a mechanism for achieving link redundancy.
Link aggregation, also known as EtherChannel or LACP, bundles multiple physical Ethernet links into a single logical link. This provides both redundancy (if one physical link fails, traffic continues over the others) and increased bandwidth, fulfilling the requirement of ensuring redundancy for the connection to the core switch.
Concept tested: Network redundancy and link aggregation
Source: https://www.cisco.com/c/en/us/td/docs/switches/lan/catalyst3750/software/release/12_2_25_see/configuration/guide/scg/swethchl.html
Community Discussion
No community discussion yet for this question.