Question 710
The HPE AOS-CX switching case is: A monitoring team treats a routine authentication denial as evidence of campus-wide routing loss. Which TWO choices together provide the targeted remedy and independent validation? (Select TWO.)
Explanation
Correct Answers
The targeted correction for A monitoring team treats a routine authentication denial as evidence of campus-wide routing loss is: Correlate event timestamps, switch identity, severity and preceding change windows to determine the next operational action. It reduces the risk that incorrect device time or unfiltered log noise can hide the precise moment of a route failure or security incident.
A separate operational validation for A monitoring team treats a routine authentication denial as evidence of campus-wide routing loss is: A test event is received with correct identity, timestamp, severity and a link to the affected switch and change. It proves intended behavior instead of accepting configuration presence alone.
Incorrect Answers
This alternative concerns vsf member and stack topology observability; its associated risk is: A surviving logical stack address can conceal a missing member and hundreds of failed physical user ports. The observed case A monitoring team treats a routine authentication denial as evidence of campus-wide routing loss requires the more specific syslog severity timestamps and event context control. The targeted action is: Correlate event timestamps, switch identity, severity and preceding change windows to determine the next operational action.
This alternative concerns central device health and inventory interpretation; its associated risk is: A portal showing a registered device is not proof its configuration is synchronized or that client-facing forwarding works. The observed case A monitoring team treats a routine authentication denial as evidence of campus-wide routing loss requires the more specific syslog severity timestamps and event context control. The targeted action is: Correlate event timestamps, switch identity, severity and preceding change windows to determine the next operational action.
This alternative concerns security event and unauthorized management detection; its associated risk is: A successful user session or high denial count alone cannot establish legitimacy or rule out an attack without correlation. The observed case A monitoring team treats a routine authentication denial as evidence of campus-wide routing loss requires the more specific syslog severity timestamps and event context control. The targeted action is: Correlate event timestamps, switch identity, severity and preceding change windows to determine the next operational action.