Exam JN0-648 topic 1 question 13 discussion

Seems like the correct answer is D. All the prefix-lists are used in the policy terms without specified keyword *orlonger*. It means that (the juniper docs says): "As you can see, the prefix list does not contain a match type for each route (as you would see with a route filter). This is an important point when using a prefix list in a policy. Routes match only if they exactly match one of the prefixes in the list. In other words, each route in the list must appear in the routing table exactly as it is configured in the prefix list.". That means if the is question asked about the 12.233.45.5/32 as the consequence term 1 and term 2 wouldn't be triggered at all.

Which action will be taken for route 12.233.45.5? This is part of the "known-ok-sites" subnet of 12.233.0.0/18. So it will be allowed by term 1. B is correct

D is the good answer. Please update

Correct answer Should be D. Prefix-list is nog matched because it”s missing le or ge statement

ed@vMX-PE1# show policy-options | display set set policy-options prefix-list PL_33 3.3.3.0/24 set policy-options policy-statement EBGP-TO-IBGP term 70 from prefix-list PL_33 set policy-options policy-statement EBGP-TO-IBGP term 70 then next-hop self set policy-options policy-statement EBGP-TO-IBGP term 70 then accept set policy-options policy-statement EBGP-TO-IBGP term 80 from protocol bgp set policy-options policy-statement EBGP-TO-IBGP term 80 from route-filter 3.3.3.33/32 exact set policy-options policy-statement EBGP-TO-IBGP term 80 to protocol bgp set policy-options policy-statement EBGP-TO-IBGP term 80 then reject set policy-options policy-statement EBGP-TO-IBGP term 90 from protocol direct set policy-options policy-statement EBGP-TO-IBGP term 90 from route-filter 10.0.13.0/24 exact set policy-options policy-statement EBGP-TO-IBGP term 90 then accept set policy-options policy-statement EBGP-TO-IBGP term 100 from protocol bgp set policy-options policy-statement EBGP-TO-IBGP term 100 then next-hop self set policy-options policy-statement EBGP-TO-IBGP term 100 then accept set policy-options policy-statement EBGP-TO-IBGP then reject

It will depend on how the route is in the routing table. If the route is 12.233.45.5/32, then term 3 will match, so D is the right answer, but if the route. The question is a little fague as to how the route looks, but based on how the question is posed, I would have to assume the route is indeed 12.233.45.5/32. According to this Juniper doc (https://www.juniper.net/documentation/en_US/junos/topics/example/policy-prefix-list.html), my understanding is the match-type still has to be specified in the policy statement term after the prefix list. Example: term 1 { from { prefix-list known-ok-sites orlonger; } the accept ..... which means term 1 and term 2 will only match exact prefix and mask

yep, B https://www.juniper.net/documentation/en_US/junos/topics/reference/configuration-statement/policy-statement-edit-policy-options.html Generally, a router compares a route against the match conditions of each term in a routing policy, starting with the first and moving through the terms in the order in which they are defined, until a match is made and an explicitly configured or default action of accept or reject is taken. If none of the terms in the policy match the route, the router compares the route against the next policy, and so on, until either an action is taken or the default policy is evaluated. 12.233.0.0/18 = 12.233.0.1 - 12.233.63.254

B is correct, as 10.233.45.5 lies within the subnet 10.233.0.0/18 that has a range of 10.233.0.1-10.233.63.254

The Term 1 will have host range "10.233.0.1 - 10.233.63.254" so it will not be accepted . I think the address will be rejected by term 2.