HP Exam HPE7-A03 Topic 4 Question 10 Discussion

Actual exam question for HP's HPE7-A03 exam

Question #: 10
Topic #: 4

'Don't Buy at Us' is a US-based retail company that is expanding Into Europe. They are expanding into EMEA with a regional headquarters called HQ2 inside The Netherlands.

Their US-based headquarters HQ1 was refreshed last year based on the Aruba ESP architecture. You have treated the design for HQ? based on the same design as HQ1. a two-tier architecture. The high level is shown below.

Switch BOM for this project based on Two Tier:

Collapsed Core: 2 x Aruba 8360-16Y2C in VSX (ISL 2 ICOG0E DAC)

Access Slack: 10 x Slack of Aruba 6200F 48G Class4 PoE 4SFP- 740W each stack has A members. VSF

with 10GbE VSF links) 12 x 10GbE uplink pet stack)

During the presentation of your design to the CTO of 'Don't Buy at Us' you were informed about the updated fiber infrastructure that Don't Buy at Us' has installed in HQ2.

The core stack is Installed in the MDF and per IOF there is one access stack installed. Based on best practice, what is the most cost-effective update to the switch BOM?

AOption A

BOption B

COption C

DOption D

Show Suggested Answer

Suggested Answer: B

Option B is the most cost-effective solution, as it does not include long-range optics, which are unnecessary given the distances and fiber types specified. The 10GbE-SR optics are suitable for short-range connections up to 300 meters over OM3 fiber and would cover the needs of the longest fiber run mentioned, which is 250 meters. The 10GbE-LRM optics, while capable of reaching up to 220 meters over OM2 fiber, would not be necessary as the longest OM2 run is 71 meters, which is within the range of standard 10GbE-SR optics. Thus, Option B provides the required connectivity without incurring additional costs for long-range optics that are not needed given the fiber infrastructure of HQ2.

by Adelina at May 29, 2024, 11:39 AM

Limited Time Offer

25%

Off

Get Premium HPE7-A03 Questions as Interactive Web-Based Practice Test or PDF

Contribute your Thoughts:

Submit Cancel

Jose

5 months ago

Alright, let's see here... Ah, I see, the key is the updated fiber infrastructure. Option C definitely makes the most sense – fewer switches, less complexity, and it still meets the requirements. Nice and clean.

upvoted 0 times

Stephaine

4 months ago

Agreed, Option C keeps it simple and efficient. Less switches, less complexity.

upvoted 0 times

...

Fausto

4 months ago

Option C is definitely the way to go. It's the most cost-effective update.

upvoted 0 times

...

Jeannine

5 months ago

Wait, did they say 'Don't Buy at Us'? I'm sorry, but I can't take this question seriously. That's the worst company name I've ever heard. I'm just going to go with whatever option has the funniest sounding equipment.

upvoted 0 times

Sommer

4 months ago

Definitely, let's go with Option B because it sounds the silliest.

upvoted 0 times

...

Iraida

4 months ago

I agree, it's pretty bad. Let's just pick the funniest sounding equipment option.

upvoted 0 times

...

Sabine

5 months ago

I know, right? 'Don't Buy at Us' is a terrible name.

upvoted 0 times

...

Lavonna

5 months ago

Hmm, I'm not so sure. Option B might be a bit overkill, but it does give you more redundancy and flexibility down the line. Gotta weigh the trade-offs, you know?

upvoted 0 times

...

Minna

5 months ago

I agree. Option A looks like it could be the best choice based on the updated fiber infrastructure.

upvoted 0 times

...

Marsha

5 months ago

I think we should consider the most cost-effective update to the switch BOM.

upvoted 0 times

...

Gearldine

5 months ago

Option C looks like the most cost-effective solution here. Fewer switches, less cabling, and it still meets the requirements. Seems like a no-brainer to me.

upvoted 0 times