somewhat of a trick because the "match-all" applies to the class map policy only, which can match various oddities like an ACL (access-group 120) and an ip precedence bit for example. you wouldn't really have multiple access groups (AGs) in the match, as that could roll up int many ACE's under just one AG - like 120.
Why would it not be B?
Isn't all traffic classified by access-list 120 going to be policed based on the class-map?
Based on the following line, exceeding traffic is dropped, NOT transmitted..
“Exceeded 5 packets, 5070 bytes, action: drop”
It isn't easy to understand it the other way around. :D
upvoted 1 times
...
...
...
...
Log in to ExamTopics
Sign in:
Community vote distribution
A (35%)
C (25%)
B (20%)
Other
Most Voted
A voting comment increases the vote count for the chosen answer by one.
Upvoting a comment with a selected answer will also increase the vote count towards that answer by one.
So if you see a comment that you already agree with, you can upvote it instead of posting a new comment.
[Removed]
6 months, 2 weeks agowr4net
1 year, 6 months ago[Removed]
3 years, 6 months agoArchBishop
2 years, 10 months agotimtgh
2 years, 6 months agoiGlitch
2 years, 1 month ago