HP HPE6-A73 Exam Dumps & Practice Test Questions

Question 1:

Which of the following statements correctly reflects how ACLs utilize TCAM resources in AOS-CX switches?

A. Assigning an ACL to a group of ports uses the same TCAM space as defining separate ACEs
B. Object groups reduce TCAM usage compared to defining individual Access Control Entries
C. ASIC TCAM compression is automatically activated on AOS-CX switches
D. Applying an ACL to multiple VLANs uses identical resources as single ACE entries

Answer: C

Explanation:

Access Control Lists (ACLs) are a foundational security feature in network switches, controlling traffic based on IP addresses, protocols, and ports. However, in high-performance switches such as those running Aruba AOS-CX, how ACLs are processed in hardware—specifically within TCAM (Ternary Content Addressable Memory)—significantly affects system efficiency and scalability.

Option C is the correct statement because automatic compression of ACL entries is enabled for ASIC TCAMs on AOS-CX switches. This built-in optimization means that when ACL rules are programmed into TCAM, the switch’s operating system intelligently compresses these entries. The compression process reduces the number of TCAM rows required to represent complex ACL configurations, which helps maximize available space and allows more rules to be supported concurrently. This capability enhances scalability and reduces the need for administrators to manually optimize rule sets for TCAM constraints.

Now let’s examine why the other options are not accurate:

• Option A suggests that applying an ACL to multiple ports uses the same resources as individual entries, but this is misleading. Depending on how the switch implements ACLs, each port might require a separate rule instance in TCAM, increasing the overall usage of hardware resources compared to a single shared rule. So, applying an ACL to a group of ports can lead to increased TCAM utilization, not reduced.

• Option B implies that using object groups minimizes TCAM usage, but this is incorrect. While object groups make configurations simpler for administrators, they are expanded into multiple Access Control Entries (ACEs) when compiled into hardware. These expansions consume the same TCAM space as if individual entries were manually defined.

• Option D makes a similar assumption about applying ACLs to multiple VLANs. In practice, applying an ACL to several VLANs requires separate references or entries for each VLAN context, which may increase TCAM consumption, especially when complex rule sets are involved.

In conclusion, automatic ACL compression in ASIC TCAM is a key advantage of AOS-CX switches. It helps reduce hardware resource usage, enabling more efficient rule deployment without manual tuning. Thus, Option C accurately reflects a built-in, resource-saving capability of AOS-CX, making it the correct answer.

Question 2:

Which statement best describes rate limiting and queue shaping behavior on Aruba AOS-CX switches?

A. Traffic rate and burst size are the only configurable parameters for a queue
B. Rate limits can only be set for broadcast and multicast traffic
C. Ingress traffic can be restricted using queue shaping and rate limiting
D. Rate limiting and shaping are applied globally across the switch

Answer: A

Explanation:

In Aruba AOS-CX switches, rate limiting and egress queue shaping are critical features for managing how traffic exits a switch. These mechanisms are especially useful in enforcing Quality of Service (QoS), ensuring bandwidth fairness, and preventing network congestion in enterprise and data center environments.

Option A is the correct answer because only the traffic rate and burst size are configurable per queue in the context of queue shaping on AOS-CX. The rate defines the average bandwidth allowed for the queue, and the burst size determines how much traffic can temporarily exceed the configured rate. These parameters work together to regulate outgoing traffic, pacing it in a controlled manner to match link capabilities or enforce traffic policies.

Queue shaping operates on egress (outbound) traffic, controlling how data is transmitted from switch interfaces. It helps prevent packet loss and buffer overflow by smoothing traffic bursts and ensuring that no single traffic class dominates bandwidth allocation. By defining per-queue rate limits, network administrators can prioritize traffic classes (e.g., voice, video, data) in alignment with organizational QoS policies.

Here’s why the other options are incorrect:

• Option B is inaccurate because rate limiting is not limited to broadcast or multicast traffic. It applies to all traffic types—unicast, multicast, and broadcast—allowing administrators to control application traffic flows more precisely.

• Option C incorrectly states that queue shaping and rate limiting can restrict inbound traffic. In AOS-CX, these features are specifically designed for egress traffic. While ingress policing is available as a separate feature to manage incoming packets, shaping and rate limiting are strictly outbound controls.

• Option D wrongly suggests that rate limiting and shaping are applied globally. On the contrary, these are configured at the port or queue level, offering granular control. This per-interface design allows for targeted traffic management, rather than a one-size-fits-all approach across the entire switch.

In summary, Aruba AOS-CX provides precise, queue-level shaping using configurable traffic rates and burst sizes. These parameters enable consistent performance, efficient bandwidth usage, and alignment with QoS strategies. Therefore, Option A is the only statement that accurately describes how rate limiting and shaping operate on AOS-CX switches.

Question 3:

A network engineer is tasked with replacing a legacy access layer with a modular architecture that supports virtual switching and dual control planes. Which AOS-CX switch model best fulfills these criteria?

A. AOS-CX 8325
B. AOS-CX 6300
C. AOS-CX 6400
D. AOS-CX 8400

Correct Answer: D

Explanation:

When selecting an access layer switch for enterprise networks, especially in mission-critical environments, the design must prioritize modularity, virtual switching support, and high availability. These requirements point directly toward an architecture that supports redundant (dual) control planes, scalability, and virtualization technologies such as Aruba’s Virtual Switching Extension (VSX) or similar.

The AOS-CX 8400 switch is uniquely positioned to meet these high-level demands. It is a modular, chassis-based platform that provides high performance and flexibility. Critically, it supports dual management modules, enabling redundant control planes—a key requirement for environments that cannot tolerate downtime due to a control plane failure. In addition, it offers robust support for VSX, non-stop forwarding, and live upgrades—ensuring operational continuity even during maintenance windows.

Let’s consider why the other options fall short:

• Option A – AOS-CX 8325: Although it supports VSX and is suitable for core or aggregation layers in smaller networks, it is a fixed-form factor device. It does not offer modular design or dual control planes, which disqualifies it from scenarios where high availability is critical at the control layer.

• Option B – AOS-CX 6300: This model is intended for access layer deployment and supports stacking, but it is neither modular nor capable of dual control planes. It's excellent for general-purpose access but lacks the architectural capabilities required in this case.

• Option C – AOS-CX 6400: This series is indeed modular and offers some high-performance features, but it only supports a single management module, making dual control plane availability impossible. This limits its application in environments demanding uninterrupted network management.

Only the AOS-CX 8400 fully satisfies the scenario’s technical requirements: modularity, virtual switching technologies, and high-availability with dual control planes. It also supports high-density 1G/10G/40G/100G interfaces, making it suitable for both core and robust access deployments.

Thus, for a future-proof, resilient access layer redesign that mandates dual control plane support, the AOS-CX 8400 (Option D) is the optimal solution.

Question 4:

An organization has enabled 802.1X authentication on AOS-CX access switches and uses two Aruba ClearPass servers. The switch configuration includes this command: radius-server tracking user-name monitor password plaintext aruba123. 

What is the purpose of this configuration?

A. To enable replay attack prevention for RADIUS messages
B. To define the account used for receiving downloadable user roles
C. To enhance the speed of authentication transactions
D. To define credentials for executing Change of Authorization requests

Correct Answer: D

Explanation:

The command radius-server tracking user-name monitor password plaintext aruba123 on AOS-CX switches is specifically used to facilitate Change of Authorization (CoA) operations between the switch and a RADIUS server like Aruba ClearPass.

Change of Authorization (CoA) is a dynamic mechanism in 802.1X networks that allows the RADIUS server to modify the authenticated user's session after initial access has been granted. This might include reassigning VLANs, updating access policies, or terminating a session in response to a policy change or a security event.

For a switch to initiate such changes with ClearPass or another RADIUS server, it must authenticate itself. The radius-server tracking command does just that—it provides the user credentials ("monitor" and "aruba123") that the switch will use when initiating CoA-related messages. These credentials are checked by the RADIUS server to authorize administrative requests from the network device.

Let’s clarify why other options are incorrect:

• Option A, which claims this is for replay protection, is misleading. Replay protection is handled through timestamps and session identifiers in RADIUS messages, not through this user account configuration.

• Option B, referencing downloadable user roles, is also incorrect. While ClearPass can push roles during the initial access-accept phase, the credentials defined in this command are not used to receive those roles but rather to authenticate CoA transactions initiated by the switch.

• Option C, suggesting speed improvements in authentication, is not relevant. The command does not impact the speed or performance of regular RADIUS authentication; it only becomes relevant for CoA or RADIUS server reachability tracking.

In essence, this command authenticates the switch itself when it needs to proactively communicate with ClearPass for policy changes after a client is already connected. This is fundamental for real-time enforcement, adaptive security, and dynamic session control in enterprise environments.

Therefore, the correct interpretation and answer is D: define credentials for executing Change of Authorization requests.

Question 5:

A company is replacing its access switches with Aruba AOS-CX 6300 and 6400 series and already uses Aruba APs with Mobility Controllers running version 8.4. They want to maintain identical security and firewall policy enforcement across both wired and wireless networks. 

Which approach should they adopt to accomplish this?

A. RADIUS dynamic authorization
B. Downloadable user roles
C. IPSec
D. User-Based Tunneling

Answer: D

Explanation:

In a mixed wired and wireless enterprise environment, maintaining a uniform policy enforcement model across both mediums is key to ensuring consistent security, user experience, and simplified management. Aruba Networks addresses this challenge with User-Based Tunneling (UBT)—a feature designed specifically to bring the same controller-based security capabilities from wireless into the wired environment.

When AOS-CX switches (such as the 6300 and 6400 series) are deployed in access layers, they can be configured to use UBT. This allows wired user traffic to be tunneled to the Aruba Mobility Controller, where the same firewall policies, access roles, bandwidth contracts, and Quality of Service (QoS) rules used for wireless clients can also be applied to wired users. This ensures full policy parity across the entire access network, enabling unified role-based access control and simplified compliance.

Option A, RADIUS dynamic authorization (also known as CoA) is used for real-time changes in user sessions (like VLAN assignment or disconnects), but it does not provide centralized, consistent enforcement of firewall policies or traffic tunneling to the controller.

Option B, Downloadable User Roles (DUR), allows the switch to receive role-based access policies from ClearPass or an AAA server at the time of user authentication. While useful, these roles are enforced locally on the switch—not centrally by the Mobility Controller. This means firewall capabilities and deep policy enforcement will vary from wireless deployments.

Option C, IPSec, is a tunneling and encryption protocol primarily used for secure site-to-site or client-to-site VPNs. It does not serve as a mechanism for enforcing uniform user-based access control between wired and wireless networks within the same enterprise LAN infrastructure.

Therefore, Option D (User-Based Tunneling) is the only solution that enables Aruba switches to tunnel wired user traffic to the Mobility Controller, applying the same dynamic roles, firewall rules, and policies used in the wireless environment. It creates a consistent security framework, simplifies network management, and supports the enterprise's goal of treating all users the same, regardless of how they connect.

Question 6:

Which CLI command sequence correctly configures a VLAN as a voice VLAN on an Aruba AOS-CX switch?

A.Switch(config)# port-access lldp-group <LLDP-group-name>
  Switch(config-lldp-group)# vlan <VLAN-ID>

B.Switch(config)# port-access role <role-name>
  Switch(config-pa-role)# vlan access <VLAN-ID>

C.Switch(config)# vlan <VLAN-ID>
  Switch(config-vlan-<VLAN-ID>)# voice

D.Switch(config)# vlan <VLAN-ID> voice

Answer: C

Explanation:

In Aruba AOS-CX, defining a VLAN specifically for voice traffic (VoIP) is a foundational step in building a network that supports IP phones with proper priority, VLAN separation, and potential use of LLDP-MED (Link Layer Discovery Protocol - Media Endpoint Discovery) for dynamic VLAN assignment.

The correct syntax to mark a VLAN as a voice VLAN is:

Switch(config)# vlan <VLAN-ID>  

Switch(config-vlan-<VLAN-ID>)# voice

This sequence enters VLAN configuration mode and explicitly sets the VLAN for voice designation using the voice command. When this setting is in place, the switch can advertise the voice VLAN ID to connected IP phones via LLDP-MED, allowing the phones to automatically tag voice traffic with the correct VLAN ID. This setup is crucial for supporting real-time traffic with proper QoS and policy application.

Option A refers to configuring an LLDP group and associating a VLAN. While LLDP-MED is part of dynamic VLAN signaling for VoIP devices, configuring an LLDP group does not alone define a VLAN as a voice VLAN. It is only part of the broader ecosystem and relies on the VLAN being properly marked first.

Option B involves setting VLAN access in a port-access role, typically used with authentication like 802.1X. This is used to assign VLANs dynamically after authentication but doesn’t define a VLAN as being used for voice globally. Also, the voice designation ensures proper QoS treatment—just assigning a VLAN doesn’t do that.

Option D is syntactically incorrect. AOS-CX doesn’t support combining VLAN creation and voice designation in one command line like vlan <VLAN-ID> voice. The voice keyword must be used inside the VLAN context.

In conclusion, Option C is the correct method to declare a VLAN as a voice VLAN in AOS-CX, supporting enterprise VoIP deployments by enabling intelligent device discovery, prioritization, and VLAN assignment mechanisms.

Question 7:

In a campus network where the administrator is deploying AOS-CX switches with VSX at the core, which feature ensures that both core switches can actively process traffic directed at the default gateway IP for VLANs?

A. VRF
B. VRRP
C. IP helper
D. Active Gateway

Correct Answer: D

Explanation:

When deploying Aruba AOS-CX switches with VSX (Virtual Switching Extension) in a campus environment, administrators aim to provide redundancy, resiliency, and load balancing. The scenario described involves ensuring that both core switches in a VSX pair can simultaneously handle client traffic destined for the default gateway—a critical requirement for high availability and seamless failover.

The Active Gateway feature in AOS-CX is purpose-built to solve this problem. It allows both VSX peers to share the same virtual IP and MAC address for the default gateway of a VLAN. Unlike traditional gateway redundancy protocols like VRRP, which operate in an active-standby mode, Active Gateway allows both switches to be active simultaneously. This results in better utilization of the network core, enhances fault tolerance, and simplifies gateway redundancy.

Let’s examine the incorrect options:

• Option A (VRF) refers to Virtual Routing and Forwarding, which enables multiple isolated routing tables on the same switch. While useful in multi-tenant networks or segmentation strategies, it does not provide gateway redundancy or support active-active gateway operations.

• Option B (VRRP) is a standard protocol used for default gateway redundancy. However, its design is active-passive; only one router actively handles traffic while the other waits in standby. This limits efficiency and does not meet the requirement of having both VSX switches actively forwarding traffic.

• Option C (IP Helper) is used to forward specific broadcast traffic, such as DHCP requests, to a remote server. While useful in supporting client IP assignments, it has no relation to gateway redundancy or active-active default gateway processing.

Therefore, Active Gateway (Option D) is the correct and recommended solution for VSX-enabled deployments. It allows for true load balancing and failover of gateway responsibilities, enhancing the availability and performance of the campus core. When implemented, devices on the VLAN can use the same default gateway IP, regardless of which core switch they’re connected to. This architecture leads to more efficient traffic flow and operational simplicity.

Question 8:

When integrating AOS-CX switches with Aruba Mobility Controllers (MCs), which statement best describes how management and user traffic is handled in terms of tunneling and security?

A. IPSec protects both management and user data traffic
B. IPSec is used only for protecting management communications
C. Only port-based tunneling is supported
D. AOS-CX switches use the same management protocol as Aruba APs

Correct Answer: B

Explanation:

In Aruba networks, when integrating AOS-CX switches with Aruba Mobility Controllers (MCs), especially for Dynamic Segmentation, it’s critical to understand how traffic is tunneled and secured. Aruba uses a dual-plane model for control and data communications, where management traffic is encrypted using IPSec, and user traffic is tunneled via GRE for performance efficiency.

The correct answer, Option B, accurately reflects this design. IPSec is employed to secure control-plane communication, which includes tunnel setup, authentication coordination, and policy enforcement messaging between the AOS-CX switch and the Mobility Controller. This ensures that any sensitive management instructions are encrypted and safeguarded against tampering or interception.

For the data plane, which includes end-user traffic like HTTP, FTP, or internal application data, GRE (Generic Routing Encapsulation) is used. GRE provides an efficient method of tunneling traffic from the switch to the controller while avoiding the processing overhead of full IPSec encryption on large volumes of user data. This separation of control and data planes ensures both security and high performance, particularly important in enterprise-scale environments with many concurrent users.

Now, examining the incorrect options:

• Option A, which suggests IPSec protects both management and user traffic, is not accurate. While IPSec is secure, encrypting all user data with it would strain processing resources and reduce throughput. Aruba’s architecture deliberately uses GRE for scalable, low-latency user traffic forwarding.

• Option C, which says only port-based tunneling is supported, is incorrect. Aruba supports both port-based and user-based tunneling. With user-based tunneling, access is determined by individual identity (e.g., via 802.1X authentication), enabling fine-grained policy control per user session.

• Option D, claiming that AOS-CX switches use the same protocol as Aruba APs, is also incorrect. Aruba APs use CAPWAP, which is tailored for wireless access points. AOS-CX switches, in contrast, use GRE for data and IPSec for management—a completely different mechanism.

In conclusion, Aruba’s architecture separates control and data responsibilities, using IPSec to secure management traffic and GRE for efficient data forwarding, making Option B the most accurate description.

Question 9:

What is the primary purpose of the Virtual Switching Framework (VSF) in Aruba CX switches?

A. To enable secure tunneling between wired and wireless traffic
B. To provide centralized wireless controller management
C. To create a single logical switch from multiple physical switches
D. To optimize WAN routing between branch sites

Correct Answer: C

Explanation:

Virtual Switching Framework (VSF) is a feature in Aruba CX switches that allows multiple physical switches to operate as one logical entity. This design provides several operational and performance benefits in enterprise switching environments.

Option C is correct because VSF enables the stacking of two or more Aruba switches, allowing them to share control and management planes. This logical switch approach simplifies network management by allowing the entire stack to be managed as a single unit. You configure the stack from a single CLI session, which simplifies provisioning and maintenance.

The key benefits of VSF include:

• Simplified management: One configuration file, one IP address for management, and unified software upgrades.

• High availability: If one member fails, the remaining switch continues operations without downtime.

• Link aggregation across switches: VSF allows for multi-chassis link aggregation, where links from different physical switches are treated as a single logical interface. This provides both redundancy and improved throughput.

Option A, secure tunneling, relates more to Aruba wireless technologies, such as tunneled node or CAPWAP. VSF is not a tunneling solution.

Option B, centralized wireless controller management, is a wireless-specific feature and typically associated with Aruba Mobility Controllers, not the VSF feature in switches.

Option D, WAN optimization, is unrelated to VSF. That area falls under Aruba SD-WAN or WAN optimization appliances.

In summary, VSF’s primary role is to improve scalability, resiliency, and ease of management in the LAN switching environment by enabling multiple physical switches to behave like a single logical switch, making Option C the correct answer.

Question 10:

Which feature in Aruba CX switches allows dynamic traffic routing decisions based on real-time path performance?

A. Static routing
B. OSPF cost-based routing
C. Policy-Based Routing (PBR)
D. Equal-Cost Multi-Path (ECMP)

Correct Answer: C

Explanation:

Policy-Based Routing (PBR) in Aruba CX switches allows administrators to make traffic-forwarding decisions based on customizable policies, rather than relying solely on routing protocols' destination-based decisions. This feature is particularly valuable in complex networks where traffic needs to be steered dynamically based on business needs, application types, or even user identity.

Option C, PBR, is correct because it allows administrators to define rules (policies) that examine characteristics of traffic—such as source IP, destination IP, protocol type, or port number—and forward packets based on these parameters, regardless of what the routing table suggests. PBR is ideal for use cases like:

• Redirecting traffic to a specific firewall or proxy

• Enforcing compliance policies by steering traffic through monitoring tools

• Separating high-priority applications from regular traffic for optimized performance

Option A, static routing, is the most basic routing technique and is not dynamic. It requires manual configuration and lacks adaptability to changing network conditions.

Option B, OSPF cost-based routing, uses link cost metrics to determine the shortest path to a destination. While OSPF can respond to topology changes, it does not offer the granular control that PBR provides for traffic steering based on application or policy.

Option D, Equal-Cost Multi-Path (ECMP), allows for load-balancing traffic across multiple equal-cost routes to the same destination. While useful for improving bandwidth usage and redundancy, ECMP lacks the traffic classification and fine control that PBR offers.

In Aruba CX, PBR is implemented through route maps and match conditions that define how traffic should be handled. It's especially powerful when combined with access control lists (ACLs) and QoS policies.

In conclusion, Policy-Based Routing (PBR) offers the most flexible, policy-driven traffic forwarding mechanism in Aruba CX, enabling intelligent routing based on customized conditions, making Option C the correct answer.