Question 1

On a 10Base2 (thin Ethernet) LAN, your client PC can access several servers but cannot access the server named RED, while other clients can. What is the most likely cause of this selective connectivity problem?

Accepted Answer

Introduction / Context: Connectivity issues that affect only a single remote server, while other servers remain reachable, often point to software or configuration mismatches rather than physical-layer faults. On legacy Ethernet like 10Base2, shared-media problems usually impact many or all devices, not just one target. Given Data / Assumptions: Your client can reach several servers on the same LAN segment. Only the server named RED is unreachable from your client, but others can reach it. The cabling is 10Base2 (coaxial bus topology), where breaks generally disrupt many nodes downstream. Concept / Approach: If physical issues (cable break, termination) existed, multiple systems would typically lose connectivity. An IRQ or NIC hardware fault would likely prevent all network access. High collision rates would degrade the entire segment, not a single client-server pair. A protocol mismatch (for example, your client only has NetBEUI, while RED only speaks TCP/IP) explains why other servers (which support your protocol) work, but RED (which requires a different protocol) does not. Step-by-Step Solution: List the protocols installed on the client (for example, TCP/IP, IPX/SPX, NetBEUI).Check the protocols bound to RED's server interfaces.If RED lacks a protocol in common with the client, install/enable the needed protocol or add TCP/IP on both sides.Test connectivity again (ping, shares, or application access) once protocols match. Verification / Alternative check: Run protocol-specific tests (for example, ping for TCP/IP). If ping fails but NetBIOS browsing works only for other servers, it reinforces a protocol mismatch diagnosis. Why Other Options Are Wrong: IRQ misconfiguration would likely break all network access, not just one server. A cable break or poor termination would affect many hosts on the bus segment. Excessive collisions slow everyone, not a single destination. Common Pitfalls: Assuming any single-host issue must be physical. Always compare installed protocol stacks across client and target server. Final Answer: There is a protocol mismatch between your client computer and RED.

Question 2

Evaluate the statement: In heavily overloaded switching backplanes, crossbar switching provides better performance than cell-backplane switching.

Accepted Answer

Introduction / Context: Switch fabric design impacts how well a switch sustains throughput as offered load increases. Two common architectures are crossbar (non-blocking port-to-port paths) and shared or cell-based backplanes (where packets are segmented into fixed-size cells and traverse shared internal bandwidth). Given Data / Assumptions: We compare performance under heavy overload. Crossbar implies multiple simultaneous, dedicated paths across the fabric. Cell backplane implies segmentation and shared internal bandwidth arbitration. Concept / Approach: Crossbar fabrics allow many non-conflicting port pairs to communicate simultaneously, reducing head-of-line blocking and internal contention. Under overload, scheduling can still allocate paths efficiently for parallel conversations. Cell-based backplanes incur segmentation/reassembly overhead, potential internal contention at shared memory or buses, and can suffer more from head-of-line blocking when queues back up. Step-by-Step Solution: Model internal contention: crossbar creates point-to-point switch paths; cell-backplane shares internal resources.Under high loads, crossbar maintains more concurrent transfers.Account for overheads: cell segmentation adds latency and buffer pressure.Conclude crossbar is superior under heavy overload. Verification / Alternative check: Vendor whitepapers and queueing models show crossbar/Clos fabrics approaching non-blocking behavior, whereas shared-memory or bus-based designs saturate earlier. Why Other Options Are Wrong: 'False' ignores well-known scaling advantages of crossbar under contention. Qualifiers about 'low utilization' or 'only unicast' miss the core architectural benefit. Common Pitfalls: Confusing front-panel line-rate claims with sustained internal switching capacity; internal architecture determines behavior under stress. Final Answer: True

Question 3

Networking security design: Are IP routers commonly used to implement packet-filtering firewalls at network boundaries?

Accepted Answer

Introduction / Context: A firewall enforces a security policy by controlling traffic between networks. While dedicated firewall appliances are prevalent, classic implementations used (and still use) routers with access control lists (ACLs) to filter packets based on addresses, ports, and protocols. Given Data / Assumptions: Routers operate at Layer 3/4 and can match on IP protocol fields. Boundary between internal and external networks requires policy enforcement. Stateless packet filtering is sufficient for many simple controls; stateful inspection may require specialized devices. Concept / Approach: Routers can implement packet-filtering firewalls by applying ACLs or filter policies on ingress/egress interfaces. These rules drop or permit traffic according to source/destination addresses, transport ports, and protocol types. While next-generation firewalls add application awareness, routers remain a valid (and common) enforcement point in layered security architectures. Step-by-Step Solution: Define policy (for example, block inbound unsolicited traffic).Implement ACLs on router interfaces aligned with policy.Test and monitor logs for hits on permit/deny statements.Iterate to maintain least-privilege rules. Verification / Alternative check: Review router configurations (for example, Cisco IOS ACLs, Juniper firewall filters) showing common firewalling at the routing boundary. Why Other Options Are Wrong: 'False' ignores widespread practice of router-based filtering. Other qualifiers (NAT, PVLAN) are unrelated to whether routers can implement firewall policies. Common Pitfalls: Relying solely on stateless ACLs for complex applications; combine with stateful/NGFW where appropriate. Final Answer: True

Question 4

On a Windows NT Server, which administrative tool should you use to see which users currently have sessions open to a particular shared directory and which files they are using?

Accepted Answer

Introduction / Context: Diagnosing access issues or preparing for maintenance on Windows NT file servers often requires finding who is connected to a share and which files are open. Windows NT includes a tool designed to view active sessions and open resources centrally. Given Data / Assumptions: The server is running Windows NT Server. A specific shared directory's current users must be identified. We need live session and open-file visibility, not static file system management. Concept / Approach: Server Manager allows administrators to view active sessions and open files on a Windows NT Server. From there, you can enumerate who is connected, what shares they are using, and even force disconnections if needed. Other tools focus on different scopes (accounts, local UI browsing, disk partitioning) and do not provide real-time share usage. Step-by-Step Solution: Open Server Manager and select the target server.Choose 'Computer' → 'Shared Directories' or 'Sessions' to view connected users.Use 'Open Files' to see handle-level detail on files in use.Optionally, close sessions prior to maintenance. Verification / Alternative check: Cross-check with 'net file' and 'net session' commands to confirm the same users and files are listed. Why Other Options Are Wrong: Windows NT Explorer browses local/remote files but does not list active sessions/files. User Manager for Domains manages users/groups/rights, not open files. Disk Administrator handles partitions/volumes, not share sessions. Common Pitfalls: Forcing a disconnect can cause unsaved work loss; notify users before closing files. Final Answer: Use Server Manager

Question 5

OSI model fundamentals: Do network bridges operate at the MAC sublayer of Layer 2 (the data link layer)?

Accepted Answer

Introduction / Context: Bridges (and modern Ethernet switches) forward frames based on MAC addresses and maintain forwarding tables to separate collision domains. Understanding the precise OSI placement helps clarify capabilities and limitations, such as lack of IP-layer routing. Given Data / Assumptions: Bridge = device that forwards frames on MAC addresses. OSI Layer 2 has two sublayers: Logical Link Control (LLC) and Media Access Control (MAC). We consider standard Ethernet bridging behavior. Concept / Approach: Bridges operate at Layer 2 and primarily at the MAC sublayer. They learn source MAC addresses, populate forwarding tables, and filter/forward frames accordingly. They do not interpret IP headers (Layer 3) and therefore do not route between subnets unless additional capabilities are present (that would make them routers or Layer-3 switches). Step-by-Step Solution: Recognize the function: MAC-based forwarding, flooding unknown unicasts, and STP for loops.Map to OSI: these are all MAC sublayer tasks at Layer 2.Conclude that the statement is true.Note: managed switches may expose higher-layer features, but pure bridging remains Layer 2. Verification / Alternative check: Protocol analyzers show bridges do not modify IP headers; they act on Ethernet frame headers (destination/source MAC). Why Other Options Are Wrong: 'False' contradicts the well-established OSI placement of bridges. Other qualifiers (VLANs, duplex) are unrelated to the bridge's OSI layer. Common Pitfalls: Confusing Layer-3 switches (which route) with pure Layer-2 bridging. Final Answer: True

Question 6

Structured cabling: What is the maximum allowed length for horizontal cabling from the telecommunications closet (TC) to the wall outlet, excluding patch cords?

Accepted Answer

Introduction / Context: Telecommunications standards (such as TIA/EIA-568) define channel and component lengths for structured cabling systems. The 'horizontal link' connects the telecommunications closet to the work area outlet and has a strict maximum to preserve performance at rated categories. Given Data / Assumptions: We are discussing the permanent horizontal cabling segment (solid conductor) from TC to outlet. Patch cords at the closet and the workstation are additional components. Copper twisted-pair cabling standards are assumed. Concept / Approach: The standard channel length is typically 100 meters total = 90 meters horizontal + up to 10 meters of patch cords. The permanent link (horizontal) itself must not exceed 90 meters to ensure that insertion loss, crosstalk, and delay parameters remain within specification for the overall 100-meter channel. Step-by-Step Solution: Identify component limits: permanent link vs. patch cords.Recall the standard total channel length of 100 m.Subtract typical patch allowance (up to 10 m) to get 90 m for horizontal.Select '90 meters' as the correct maximum for the horizontal run. Verification / Alternative check: Review structured cabling guidelines: many design documents explicitly state 90 m permanent link plus 10 m patch cords. Why Other Options Are Wrong: 3 m and 6 m are typical patch cord lengths, not horizontal run limits. 300 m far exceeds copper Ethernet standards and would violate attenuation limits. None of the above is incorrect since 90 m is correct. Common Pitfalls: Confusing total channel length (100 m) with the horizontal-only limit (90 m). Designers must budget patch length accordingly. Final Answer: 90 meters

Question 7

On Windows NT Server, you want to create a printer pool that uses four identical shared printers to improve throughput and availability. What key configuration must be applied consistently for pooling to work correctly?

Accepted Answer

Introduction / Context: Printer pooling lets one logical printer object distribute jobs to multiple identical physical printers. Users print to a single share name while the server directs jobs to any available device, improving capacity and uptime. Given Data / Assumptions: Four physical printers are to be pooled under one logical printer. Windows NT Server supports 'Enable printer pooling' on the printer object. Devices should be functionally identical for predictable output. Concept / Approach: Pooling requires that all devices in the pool use the same driver and capabilities so jobs render identically regardless of which device prints them. In practice, you enable pooling on the logical printer and associate multiple ports (each targeting a separate device). Identical drivers and settings ensure layout, finishing options, and fonts behave the same across devices. Step-by-Step Solution: Install the correct driver once for the logical printer.Enable 'Enable printer pooling' in printer properties.Select multiple ports (each mapping to a different physical printer).Confirm all four devices use the same driver/settings so jobs are interchangeable. Verification / Alternative check: Pause one device or set it offline; jobs should flow to other pooled devices without user intervention, producing identical output. Why Other Options Are Wrong: Sharing the same parallel port is impossible for multiple physical devices. Network-interface devices are common but not strictly required; pooling works with any ports as long as devices are identical. Different properties per device can yield inconsistent results and defeat pooling transparency. Common Pitfalls: Mixing printers with different accessories (duplexers, trays) or firmware leads to mismatched output; keep hardware and drivers uniform. Final Answer: Specify the same printer driver and settings for all printers

Question 8

In classic Windows NT domain administration, which statement about a local group account that is created by User Manager for Domains is accurate and practically useful for access control planning?

Accepted Answer

Introduction / Context: Windows NT 4.0–era domains differentiate among user accounts, global groups, and local groups (domain local groups). Understanding the scope of each object is critical when you design permissions across multiple domains with one-way or two-way trusts. This question focuses on what you can and cannot do with a local group that you create in User Manager for Domains. Given Data / Assumptions: Environment uses classic Windows NT domain model (pre–Active Directory). Local groups are created within a resource domain to grant permissions on resources in that same domain. Trusts may exist to allow identities from other domains to be recognized. Concept / Approach: In NT 4.0, global groups = collect users from their own account domain and local groups = granted permissions on resources within the local (resource) domain. The well-known strategy is “put Users into Global Groups; put Global Groups into Local Groups; assign Permissions to Local Groups.” Local groups do not travel across domain boundaries; their scope is confined to the domain where they are defined. Step-by-Step Solution: Identify the object: a local group created in User Manager for Domains.Recall scope: a local group's scope is the local (resource) domain only; it cannot be used directly in trusting domains.Check alternatives: global groups can be members of local groups (not the reverse), and users are not “auto-added” to Domain Users unless they are user accounts, not local groups.Conclude: the true statement is that the local group cannot be used in trusting domains. Verification / Alternative check: Documentation of NT 4.0 domain scopes confirms that local groups are not assignable outside their domain. Cross-domain access is achieved by adding global groups from the trusted (account) domain into local groups on the resource domain, not by reusing local groups elsewhere. Why Other Options Are Wrong: Added to global groups: Invalid; membership direction is global → local, not local → global. Automatically added to Domain Users: That applies to new user accounts, not to groups. Must be added to a local group: A local group is a local group; the phrasing is incorrect and circular. None of the above: Incorrect because one statement is correct. Common Pitfalls: Confusing group scopes with Active Directory universal groups; assuming local groups can span domains like AD groups can. Final Answer: The account cannot be used in trusting domains

Question 9

In Microsoft networking, what does Windows Internet Name Service (WINS) do, and what role does it play in NetBIOS name resolution on TCP/IP networks?

Accepted Answer

Introduction / Context: Before widespread DNS-only environments, Windows networks frequently relied on NetBIOS names (for example, \SERVER). Windows Internet Name Service (WINS) provided a server-based, query/registration mechanism to map those NetBIOS names to IP addresses, reducing broadcast dependency and improving name-resolution reliability across routed networks. Given Data / Assumptions: Clients and servers use TCP/IP with NetBIOS over TCP/IP enabled. WINS servers are reachable to handle dynamic registrations and lookups. Goal is to resolve machine names to IP addresses without excessive broadcasts. Concept / Approach: WINS provides a centralized database for NetBIOS-name → IP-address mappings. Clients dynamically register their names and addresses with WINS, and other clients query WINS to resolve names. This reduces the need for NetBIOS broadcast name queries, especially across subnets where broadcasts would not traverse routers. DHCP handles IP address allocation; WINS is about name resolution, not addressing. Step-by-Step Solution: Identify function: map NetBIOS names to IP addresses.Separate roles: DHCP allocates addresses; WINS resolves names.Assess traffic: centralized queries reduce broadcast storms compared with pure broadcast name resolution.Select the option that states “resolves computer names to IP addresses.” Verification / Alternative check: Packet captures show NetBIOS Name Service (NBNS) unicast queries to WINS servers and registration packets on startup, confirming its resolver role rather than address assignment. Why Other Options Are Wrong: Dynamically allocates IPs: That is DHCP, not WINS. Runs only on NT Workstation: WINS is a server service; historically installed on Windows NT Server. Increases broadcast traffic: WINS reduces broadcast traffic by enabling unicast name resolution. None of the above: Incorrect because one option is correct. Common Pitfalls: Conflating WINS with DNS or DHCP; assuming NetBIOS names are resolved via DNS without additional configuration. Final Answer: Resolves computer names to IP addresses

Question 10

LAN design best practice: “Bridges are ideally used in environments where there are several well-defined workgroups.” Is this statement accurate in classic Layer-2 segmentation scenarios?

Accepted Answer

Introduction / Context: Before ubiquitous Layer-3 switching and VLANs, bridges (and later multiport bridges known as switches) were widely used to segment Ethernet LANs. The goal was to reduce collision domains, improve throughput, and keep traffic localized within workgroups while maintaining a single IP subnet or broadcast domain as needed. Given Data / Assumptions: Multiple, well-defined workgroups exist (for example, Accounting, Engineering, and Sales). Traffic is heavier within each workgroup than between workgroups. A Layer-2 device (bridge/switch) can learn MAC addresses and forward frames selectively. Concept / Approach: A bridge filters intra-segment traffic and forwards only frames destined for MACs on other segments. When workgroups are well-defined, segmentation minimizes unnecessary traffic between groups and reduces collisions (in shared media) or switch fabric load (in switched media). This preserves a unified Layer-3 view (same subnet) while offering performance and fault isolation benefits at Layer-2. Step-by-Step Solution: Identify need: keep heavy intra-group traffic local.Apply bridging: create segments per workgroup; the bridge forwards only when the destination MAC is on a different segment.Result: fewer collisions and improved effective bandwidth within each group.Conclusion: the statement aligns with classic design guidance—bridges are ideal in such environments. Verification / Alternative check: Performance measurements in bus Ethernet eras demonstrated notable improvements after segmenting by workgroup. Modern switches inherit this benefit and add VLANs for finer control. Why Other Options Are Wrong: False: Ignores the key benefit of selective forwarding and traffic localization that workgroup-based segmentation provides. Common Pitfalls: Assuming bridging equals routing. Bridges operate at Layer-2 and do not split broadcast domains; for broadcast control you need VLANs or routers. Final Answer: True

Question 11

LAN bridges and interoperability: Because bridges are store-and-forward (they buffer complete frames before forwarding), is it possible to interconnect different LAN segments that use different MAC protocols (for example, Ethernet and Token Ring) us…

Accepted Answer

Introduction: Bridges are classic Layer 2 devices that receive entire frames, buffer them, and then forward them based on MAC addresses. A frequent question in exams is whether buffering alone enables interoperability across different LAN types. The nuanced answer is that translational bridges can, in fact, connect different MAC protocols (for example, Ethernet to Token Ring) by translating framing details, while still performing the store-and-forward action typical of bridges. Given Data / Assumptions: Bridge operates in store-and-forward mode (buffers frames). Different LAN segments may use different MAC/PHY conventions (e.g., frame formats, bit order, MTU). The question asks if interconnection is possible using suitable bridging. Concept / Approach: A standard transparent bridge connects like-technology LANs (e.g., Ethernet to Ethernet). A translational bridge, however, implements protocol translation between dissimilar MACs while still forwarding at Layer 2. Because a translational bridge buffers and rewrites frames, it can map fields, adjust addresses/lengths, and handle differences in framing conventions so end stations can communicate across heterogeneous LANs without a Layer 3 router. Step-by-Step Solution: 1) Identify that a bridge buffers frames → store-and-forward behavior.2) Recognize two categories: transparent bridges (same MAC type) and translational bridges (different MAC types).3) Understand that translational bridges modify MAC-level encapsulation while preserving payloads.4) Conclude: with the appropriate translational bridge, different MAC LANs can be interconnected. Verification / Alternative check: Historical implementations (e.g., Ethernet–Token Ring translational bridges) are well-documented in enterprise networks and standards guidance. They preserve Layer 3 transparency while adapting Layer 2 framing differences. Why Other Options Are Wrong: Incorrect: Dismisses the existence of translational bridges. Only possible with routers: Routers operate at Layer 3 and are not required when a translational bridge suffices. Applies only to identical Ethernet segments: True for transparent bridges, but the question concerns whether it is possible across different MACs. Not applicable in IEEE 802 networks: Misleading; translational bridging has been used within IEEE 802 environments. Common Pitfalls: Equating all bridges with “same-MAC only” behavior; forgetting that translational bridging exists to span dissimilar MACs without moving up to routing. Final Answer: Correct

Question 12

Windows NT home directories scenario: Jan (Windows NT Workstation) can access her server-based home directory, but Kim (Windows for Workgroups) cannot. After logon, what action enables Kim to reach her home directory on the Windows NT Server?

Accepted Answer

Introduction: Home directories on Windows NT Server are typically UNC paths (for example, \\SERVER\Users\Kim) that users access after logon. Clients as old as Windows for Workgroups (WfW) can still connect to SMB shares, provided name resolution and credentials are valid. The question asks what concrete step enables access for the WfW client. Given Data / Assumptions: Home directories reside on Windows NT Server. Jan uses Windows NT Workstation and can access her share. Kim uses Windows for Workgroups and cannot access her share by default. SMB/CIFS networking is available on the LAN. Concept / Approach: Windows for Workgroups supports SMB file sharing but typically requires manual mapping to a server share. Mapping a network drive (for example, drive H:) to Kim’s home directory explicitly connects her client to the UNC path with appropriate credentials. Replication services and relocating directories are irrelevant to basic access. There is no requirement that only NT clients can use home directories. Step-by-Step Solution: 1) Confirm Kim's home directory is shared on the server with proper permissions.2) On Kim's WfW computer, open the network client and connect to \\SERVER\Kim (or equivalent).3) Supply valid user credentials if prompted.4) Assign a drive letter so the home directory is easily accessible after logon. Verification / Alternative check: Testing a manual UNC connection confirms SMB reachability. Persisted mappings on logon ensure the drive remains available. Why Other Options Are Wrong: Replication service: unrelated to client access of a single share. Relocate directory locally: breaks the central home directory model. Only NT clients: incorrect—WfW can access SMB shares. Create a hidden local share: does not connect to the server path users need. Common Pitfalls: Confusing domain logon with share mapping; older clients often need explicit drive mappings. Final Answer: Map a network drive on Kim's Windows for Workgroups computer to her server home directory

Question 13

Bridge placement and traffic locality: Do bridges generally improve performance when most resource access is outside the local segment, or when most traffic stays local within the segment?

Accepted Answer

Introduction: Bridges (and switches) partition collision domains and filter frames so that local traffic stays local. The performance win appears when a significant share of communication is between stations on the same segment, reducing unnecessary transit across the bridge. If most traffic is destined for external segments, the bridge forwards a large fraction of frames anyway, yielding limited improvement. Given Data / Assumptions: We compare scenarios where traffic is local vs. predominantly remote. Bridge operates at Layer 2 and forwards based on learned MAC addresses. Goal is segment isolation and reduced unnecessary traffic. Concept / Approach: Bridges learn MAC-to-port mappings and forward only when necessary. If devices primarily talk to peers on their own segment, the bridge filters those frames and prevents them from crossing to other segments—improving overall throughput and reducing congestion elsewhere. Conversely, if most communication is to remote servers or other segments, almost all frames must traverse the bridge, diminishing the advantage. Step-by-Step Solution: 1) Identify communication patterns: local-to-local vs. local-to-remote.2) Recall that bridges forward only inter-segment traffic and filter intra-segment traffic.3) Infer that maximum benefit occurs when intra-segment traffic is high.4) Conclude the statement “bridges help when most access is outside the local segment” is incorrect. Verification / Alternative check: Design guides emphasize grouping chatty hosts or client–server pairs on the same segment/VLAN to reduce uplink load and improve performance—bridging/switching then contains local conversations. Why Other Options Are Wrong: Only true on full-duplex links / fiber backbones: Duplex or medium type does not reverse the locality principle. Not applicable to switched Ethernet: Switched Ethernet is a bridge; the same logic applies. Common Pitfalls: Placing servers remotely and expecting a bridge to solve congestion; moving servers or segmenting by usage often helps more. Final Answer: Incorrect — bridges help most when traffic remains local to each segment

Question 14

IEEE 802.5 (Token Ring) media access control: What is the functional purpose of the circulating token in a token-passing network?

Accepted Answer

Introduction: Token-passing is a deterministic media access control (MAC) method used in technologies such as IEEE 802.5 Token Ring and certain token bus systems. The core idea is to avoid collisions by granting explicit, rotating permission to transmit. Understanding what the token does—and what it does not do—clarifies how access is coordinated. Given Data / Assumptions: A logical ring connects stations. A short control frame (the token) circulates around the ring. Only one station at a time may send user data. Concept / Approach: The token is a special frame that confers transmit rights. A station must possess the token before sending data; once finished or after a time limit, it releases a token so the next station may transmit. This controlled turn-taking prevents collisions and provides bounded access times. The token does not inherently encode routing between different rings, nor does it permanently assign priority to a particular node. Step-by-Step Solution: 1) Identify that only the token holder may transmit.2) Note that access rotates; no permanent “highest priority” is implied by simply holding the token.3) Recognize the token is a control frame, not a routing packet.4) Select the option that describes transmit permission. Verification / Alternative check: Standards and textbooks define the token as the MAC permission mechanism. Priority schemes can exist, but the basic token does not equal permanent top priority. Why Other Options Are Wrong: Higher throughput on twisted pair: Throughput depends on many factors; not guaranteed solely by token passing. Permanent highest priority: Token possession is temporary. Token carries routing information: Incorrect; it is not a routing frame. None of the above: invalid because the transmit-permission statement is correct. Common Pitfalls: Assuming token passing always outperforms CSMA/CD; performance depends on load and implementation details. Final Answer: Only the station holding the token is permitted to transmit frames

Question 15

Windows NT domains and trust: DESIGN trusts SALES. A color printer in DESIGN grants permissions to DESIGN\Domain Users and DESIGN\Domain Guests, and the Guest account is enabled in DESIGN. User JohnY logs on with an account from SALES. What must y…

Accepted Answer

Introduction: In Windows NT-style domains, a trust allows authentication from one domain (SALES) to be recognized by another (DESIGN). However, authorization to resources in the trusting domain still depends on group membership in that domain. This question tests whether you can distinguish authentication from authorization and correctly place the user into a group that already has permissions. Given Data / Assumptions: DESIGN trusts SALES (so SALES users can be authenticated). The printer's DACL grants access to DESIGN\Domain Users and DESIGN\Domain Guests. DESIGN's Guest account is enabled. JohnY is a SALES domain user and currently not a member of DESIGN groups. Concept / Approach: Trusts provide cross-domain authentication, but access is controlled by ACL entries that reference local domain groups or specific users. To grant access without redefining permissions, add the external user to one of the allowed groups in DESIGN. Since the printer already allows DESIGN\Domain Guests and the Guest account is enabled, adding JohnY to DESIGN\Domain Guests is the minimal and sufficient action (alternatively, adding to DESIGN\Domain Users would also work, but the least privilege approach is Guest in this scenario). Step-by-Step Solution: 1) Confirm trust: SALES → DESIGN (authentication is recognized).2) Review printer permissions: DESIGN groups only.3) Choose a DESIGN group that already has permissions (Domain Guests).4) Add JohnY (a SALES principal) to DESIGN\Domain Guests to grant access. Verification / Alternative check: After group membership is established and replicated, JohnY should enumerate and use the printer from a SALES logon session, proving that authorization is granted across the trust via group inclusion. Why Other Options Are Wrong: No action needed: Wrong—he is not yet in any permitted DESIGN group. Impossible with this configuration: Incorrect—trust enables cross-domain membership in DESIGN groups. Enable anonymous access: Not recommended and not necessary; it bypasses proper authorization. DESIGN Domain Users: Would work but is more privilege than necessary; the question asks what must you do—adding to Domain Guests satisfies existing permissions with least privilege. Common Pitfalls: Confusing authentication (trust) with authorization (permissions and group membership); assuming trusts alone confer access. Final Answer: Add JohnY to the DESIGN Domain Guests group

Question 16

Auditing sign-ins in a Windows NT domain: You want to increase security by monitoring all user logon attempts across the network. Which administrative action should you take?

Accepted Answer

Introduction: Security auditing on Windows NT domains records successful and failed logon attempts and writes them to the Security event log. Properly enabling auditing helps detect unauthorized access, brute-force attempts, or account misuse, and supports compliance reporting. Given Data / Assumptions: Environment is Windows NT domain. Goal is to record all user logon attempts. Need the correct administrative tool and policy setting. Concept / Approach: Use User Manager for Domains to configure the domain Audit Policy. Enable “Audit logon events” for success and/or failure as required. Once enabled, domain controllers record authentication attempts in the Security log. Performance Monitor is for performance counters, Alerter is unrelated to auditing, and Server Manager is not the tool to set the domain audit policy for all logons. Step-by-Step Solution: 1) Open User Manager for Domains on a domain controller.2) Navigate to Policies → Audit.3) Check “Audit logon events” (success and/or failure).4) Review Security logs on DCs to monitor entries and set log retention. Verification / Alternative check: Create a test account and attempt a logon; verify an event ID appears under the Security log indicating a success or failure, confirming auditing works. Why Other Options Are Wrong: Performance Monitor: Tracks counters, not security events. Alerter service: Sends administrative alerts, not audit logs. Server Manager workstation-only auditing: Misstates scope; domain policy is the correct approach. DHCP accounting: Not a user logon audit mechanism. Common Pitfalls: Forgetting to size Security log files and to forward/centralize logs for retention and analysis. Final Answer: Use User Manager for Domains to enable auditing of logon events

Question 17

Layering in Ethernet: Does an Ethernet switch operate at the Data Link layer (Layer 2) rather than at a higher “protocol” (Layer 3) routing layer?

Accepted Answer

Introduction: Understanding OSI layering clarifies device roles. Ethernet switches forward frames based on MAC addresses and maintain a forwarding (CAM) table—characteristics of Layer 2. Routers, by contrast, operate at Layer 3 using IP addresses to make routing decisions. The question reframes a common misconception about “protocol layers.” Given Data / Assumptions: Device under discussion: Ethernet switch. Goal: identify its primary OSI layer of operation. Ignore Layer 3 switch/router hybrids, which add routing functions. Concept / Approach: A classic Ethernet switch performs MAC learning and filtering/forwarding of frames within a broadcast domain. It does not inspect or rely on IP headers to make basic forwarding decisions. VLAN features and full-duplex operation do not change the fundamental Layer 2 role; they extend segmentation and collision-avoidance within the same layer. Step-by-Step Solution: 1) Identify addressing used: MAC addresses → Layer 2.2) Recognize functions: learning, flooding, and forwarding frames.3) Distinguish from routers that examine Layer 3 headers.4) Conclude the statement that switches work at Layer 2 is correct. Verification / Alternative check: Switch show commands display MAC tables, not IP routing tables (unless L3 features are explicitly enabled on multilayer devices). Why Other Options Are Wrong: Layer 3 claim: Confuses routers or multilayer switches with basic switches. “Only when VLANs are disabled” / “Only on half-duplex”: VLANs and duplex modes do not change the OSI layer. Wi-Fi only: Irrelevant; wired Ethernet switching is Layer 2 as well. Common Pitfalls: Assuming “Layer 3 switch” means all switches are Layer 3; multilayer devices add routing but still switch at Layer 2 for intra-VLAN traffic. Final Answer: Correct — an Ethernet switch is a Layer 2 device using MAC addresses

Question 18

Windows user profiles: When does the system use the default profile to create or substitute a user profile during logon?

Accepted Answer

Introduction: Windows maintains per-user profiles that hold desktop settings, registry hives, and application data. The Default User profile provides a template used to create new local profiles. Understanding when this default is applied helps troubleshoot profile creation and recovery behaviors at logon. Given Data / Assumptions: A user is logging on to a given computer. No local profile may exist yet, or an existing profile might be missing/corrupted. We need the canonical case when the system default profile is used. Concept / Approach: The system copies the Default User profile to create a new local profile the first time any account logs on to a specific computer. This seeds initial settings. Although a default profile can also be referenced when a mandatory/roaming profile is unavailable, the textbook first-order answer is the initial logon scenario, where no local profile exists and the default is cloned. Step-by-Step Solution: 1) Determine whether a local profile already exists.2) If none exists → Windows clones the Default User profile to create one.3) Subsequent logons load the created user profile, not the default.4) Therefore, the definitive trigger is the user’s first logon to that computer. Verification / Alternative check: Inspect C:\Users (or WINNT\Profiles on older systems) after a first logon: a new folder matching the username appears, derived from Default User. Why Other Options Are Wrong: No user logged on: No profile is needed. Guest account: Not necessarily tied to default profile creation. Missing/corrupted profile: A fallback can occur, but the canonical, always-true case is the first logon creation. Roaming disabled: Irrelevant to using the default template on first logon. Common Pitfalls: Confusing roaming/mandatory profile failures with initial profile creation; both may touch defaults, but the primary, predictable event is the very first logon on a given machine. Final Answer: When a user logs on to this computer for the first time and no local profile exists

Question 19

Switch fabric design: In a cell-backplane architecture, should the internal backplane throughput be significantly higher than the sum of the port data rates to avoid bottlenecks?

Accepted Answer

Introduction: Modern switches often use a fabric or cell-based backplane to move traffic between ingress and egress ports. A key design metric is whether the internal switching capacity (backplane bandwidth) can handle worst-case traffic patterns without becoming a chokepoint. This question tests understanding of non-blocking switch design principles. Given Data / Assumptions: Multiple ports can send/receive simultaneously. Traffic patterns can be adversarial (many-to-one, incast) or uniform. The backplane aggregates flows and must avoid internal congestion. Concept / Approach: A “non-blocking” or “wire-speed” switch must ensure its internal fabric capacity meets or exceeds aggregate port demand, factoring full-duplex operation (ingress + egress) and oversubscription targets. In cell-backplane designs, frames are segmented into cells and switched across a crossbar or fabric. Provisioning a backplane rate significantly higher than the sum of ports reduces head-of-line blocking and ensures sustained throughput under load. Step-by-Step Solution: 1) Sum potential port throughput (consider full-duplex).2) Compare to internal fabric capacity.3) If backplane < aggregate, internal contention limits performance.4) Therefore, design for backplane ≥ aggregate (often greater) to avoid bottlenecks. Verification / Alternative check: Vendor datasheets quote “switching capacity” and “forwarding rate.” Non-blocking models list capacities at or above aggregate line rate for all ports concurrently. Why Other Options Are Wrong: Incorrect / only for half-duplex / only with jumbo / only for fiber: Backplane provisioning concerns exist regardless of duplex, frame size, or medium. Common Pitfalls: Comparing only uplink bandwidth and ignoring internal crossbar limits; missing that full-duplex doubles edge demand. Final Answer: Correct

Question 20

Forwarding methods: Does a cut-through Ethernet switch read only the initial portion of the frame (for example, up to the destination MAC) and begin forwarding before the entire packet is received?

Accepted Answer

Introduction: Ethernet switches commonly implement one of two forwarding modes: store-and-forward or cut-through. The distinction affects latency and error handling. This question checks whether you know that cut-through switching minimizes latency by starting transmission as soon as the destination address (and possibly VLAN tag) is parsed. Given Data / Assumptions: We are discussing Ethernet switching behavior. Cut-through mode emphasizes low latency over full error checking before forward. Store-and-forward reads the entire frame and validates the FCS first. Concept / Approach: In cut-through, the switch forwards a frame as soon as it determines the egress port (typically after parsing the destination MAC and any necessary header fields). This reduces per-hop latency. By contrast, store-and-forward receives the full frame, verifies the FCS, and only then forwards—adding latency but improving error containment. Many devices support hybrids (fragment-free) that read a minimum portion to avoid forwarding collisions fragments. Step-by-Step Solution: 1) Identify the forwarding decision point: destination MAC found early in the frame.2) Recognize that cut-through forwards immediately after this lookup.3) Contrast with store-and-forward, which waits for the full frame and FCS.4) Conclude that the statement “cut-through reads the entire packet first” is incorrect; the correct understanding is early forwarding. Verification / Alternative check: Latency measurements show cut-through switches forwarding within microseconds tied to header reception time rather than full frame duration. Why Other Options Are Wrong: Store-and-forward claim: Describes the opposite mode. Jumbo/fiber/Token Ring qualifiers: Irrelevant to the fundamental definition of cut-through. Common Pitfalls: Assuming all switches always validate FCS first; that is specific to store-and-forward mode, not cut-through. Final Answer: Correct — cut-through forwards after reading the header, not the entire frame

Windows NT Questions