NEW QUESTION 66
An LTM Specialist is troubleshooting an issue with a new virtual server. When connecting through the virtual server, clients receive the message “Unable to connect” in the browser, although connections directly to the pool member show the application is functioning correctly. The LTM device configuration is:
ltm virtual /Common/vs_https {
destination /Common/10.10.1.110:443
ip-protocol udp
mask 255.255.255.255
pool /Common/pool_https
profiles {
/Common/udp { }
}
translate-address enabled
translate-port enabled
vlans-disabled
}
ltm pool /Common/pool_https {
members {
/Common/172.16.20.1:443 {
address 172.16.20.1
}
}
}
What issue is the LTM Specialist experiencing?

NEW QUESTION 67
An LTM Specialist needs to rewrite text within an HTML response from a web server. A client is sending the following HTTP request:
GET / HTTP/1.1 Host: www.example.com User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:16.0) Gecko/20100101 Firefox/16.0 Accept: text/html,application/xhtml+xml,application/xml;q=0.9,*/*;q=0.8 Accept-LanguagE.en-US,en;q=0.5 Accept-EncodinG.gzip, deflate Cache-Control: no-cache Connection: keep-alive CookiE.somecookie=1
HTTP/1.1 200 OK Server: Apache/2.2.15 (Unix) Last-ModifieD.Wed, 12 Aug 2009 00:00:30 GMT Accept-Ranges: bytes Content-LengtH.1063 X-Cnection: close Content-TypE.text/html; charset=UTF-8 Vary: Accept-Encoding Content-EncodinG.gzip Connection: Keep-Alive
Although a stream profile has been added to the virtual server, the content within the HTTP response is NOT being matched and therefore NOT modified.
Which header field is contributing to the issue?

NEW QUESTION 68
An LTM Specialist is troubleshooting an HTTP monitor. The pool member is accessible directly through a browser, but the HTTP monitor is marking the pool member as down.
GET / HTTP/1.1
HTTP/1.1 400 Bad Request DatE.Tue, 23 Oct 2012 21:39:07 GTM Server: Apache/2.2.22 (FreeBSD) PHP/5.4.4 mod_ssl/2.2.22 OpenSSL/0.9.8q DAV/2 Content-LengtH.226
Connection: close
Content-TypE.text/html; charset=iso-8859-1
How should the LTM Specialist resolve this issue?

NEW QUESTION 69
— Exhibit-

— Exhibit –
Refer to the exhibit.
A company uses a complex piece of client software that connects to one or more virtual servers (VS) hosted on an LTM device. The client software is experiencing issues. An LTM Specialist is tasked with finding the cause of the problem.
The LTM Specialist has the tcpdump extract and knows the client software has at least one connection to a VS on port 1990. However, when a tcpdump runs on the internal VLAN, there is no record of port 1990 in the tcpdump.
Why is there no record of port 1990 in the tcpdump?

NEW QUESTION 70
— Exhibit –

— Exhibit —
Refer to the exhibit.
An LTM Specialist is working on an LTM 11.0.0 installation and has identified a security vulnerability as shown in the exhibit. The LTM Specialist is tasked with applying the latest available hotfix to resolve the problem.
Which procedure resolves the problem?

NEW QUESTION 71
There are three servers in the pool: 172.16.20.1, 172.16.20.2, and 172.16.20.3, with the virtual IP address 10.0.20.88.
A user CANNOT connect to an HTTP application. To understand the problem and find a solution, the LTM Specialist runs two concurrent traces on the LTM device, with the following results:
Trace on client side:
tcpdump: verbose output suppressed, use -v or -vv for full protocol decode
listening on 0.0, link-type EN10MB (Ethernet), capture size 96 bytes
22:22:07.423759 IP 172.16.20.100.53875 > 10.0.20.88.80: S 998346084:998346084(0)
win 5840 <mss 1460,sackOK,timestamp 67942058 0,nop,wscale 4>
22:22:07.424056 IP 10.0.20.88.80 > 172.16.20.100.53875: S 4671780:4671780(0) ack
998346085 win 4380 <mss 1460,nop,wscale 0,nop,nop,timestamp 2392362490 67942058,sackOK,eol> 22:22:07.424776 IP 172.16.20.100.53875 > 10.0.20.88.80: . ack 1 win 365
<nop,nop,timestamp 67942058 2392362490>
22:22:07.424790 IP 172.16.20.100.53875 > 10.0.20.88.80: P 1:149(148) ack 1 win 365 <nop,nop,timestamp 67942058 2392362490> 22:22:07.424891 IP 10.0.20.88.80 > 172.16.20.100.53875: . ack 149 win 4528
<nop,nop,timestamp 2392362491 67942058>
22:22:12.024850 IP 10.0.20.88.80 > 172.16.20.100.53875: R 1:1(0) ack 149 win 4528
6 packets captured
6 packets received by filter
0 packets dropped by kernel
Trace on server side:
tcpdump: verbose output suppressed, use -v or -vv for full protocol decode
listening on internal, link-type EN10MB (Ethernet), capture size 96 bytes
22:22:07.424881 IP 172.16.20.100.53875 > 172.16.20.2.80: S 51116678:51116678(0) win
4380 <mss 1460,nop,wscale 0,nop,nop,timestamp 2392362491 0,sackOK,eol>
22:22:08.424893 IP 172.16.20.100.53875 > 172.16.20.2.80: S 51116678:51116678(0) win 4380 <mss 1460,nop,wscale 0,nop,nop,timestamp 2392363491 0,sackOK,eol>
22:22:09.625082 IP 172.16.20.100.53875 > 172.16.20.2.80: S 51116678:51116678(0) win 4380 <mss 1460,nop,wscale 0,nop,nop,timestamp 2392364691 0,sackOK,eol>
22:22:10.825194 IP 172.16.20.100.53875 > 172.16.20.2.80: S 51116678:51116678(0) win 4380 <mss 1460,sackOK,eol>
4 packets captured 4 packets received by filter 0 packets dropped by kernel
What should the LTM Specialist do to solve the problem?

NEW QUESTION 72
A device group is made up of four members: LTM-A, LTM-B, LTM-C, and LTM-D. An LTM Specialist makes a configuration change on LTM-B. Later, a different LTM Specialist notices a “changes pending” message on all devices. When logged into LTM-D, the LTM Specialist attempts to config-sync to the device group. The sync operation fails.
Why is the LTM Specialist on LTM-D unable to synchronize the configuration to the group?

NEW QUESTION 73
These log entries can have different root causes:
Jun 28 05:01:21 LTM_A notice mcpd[27545]: 0107143a:5: CMI reconnect timer: enabled Jun 28 05:01:21 LTM_A notice mcpd[27545]: 01071431:5: Attempting to connect to CMI peer 1.1.1.2 port 6699
Jun 28 05:01:21 LTM_A notice mcpd[27545]: 01071432:5: CMI peer connection established to 1.1.1.2 port 6699
Jun 28 05:01:26 LTM_A notice mcpd[27545]: 0107143a:5: CMI reconnect timer: disabled, all peers are connected
Which two commands should be used to obtain additional information on these entries? (Choose two.)

NEW QUESTION 74
Given the iRule:
when HTTP_REQUEST { if {([HTTP::username] ne “”) and ([HTTP::password] ne “”) } { log local0. “client ip [IP::remote_addr] credentials provided [HTTP::username] [HTTP::password]”} else { pool old_application_pool }
} The associated virtual server has a default pool named new_application_pool.
Which functionality does the iRule provide?

NEW QUESTION 75
— Exhibit –

— Exhibit —
Refer to the exhibit.
A user is unable to access an HTTP application via a virtual server.
What is the cause of the failure?

NEW QUESTION 76
— Exhibit –

— Exhibit —
Refer to the exhibit.
An LTM Specialist is troubleshooting a new HTTP monitor on a pool. The pool member is functioning correctly when accessed directly through a browser. However, the monitor is marking the member as down. The LTM Specialist captures the monitor traffic via tcpdump.
What is the issue?

NEW QUESTION 77
— Exhibit –


— Exhibit —
Refer to the exhibits.
How should the LTM Specialist minimize the configuration?

NEW QUESTION 78
— Exhibit –

— Exhibit –
Refer to the exhibit.
An LTM Specialist has a virtual server set up on the LTM device as per the exhibit. The LTM Specialist receives reports of intermittent issues. Some clients are connecting fine while others are failing to connect.
The LTM Specialist does a tcpdump on the relevant interfaces, with the following results extracted:
What is causing the intermittent issues?

NEW QUESTION 79
— Exhibit –

— Exhibit —
Refer to the exhibit.
Which step should an LTM Specialist take next to finish upgrading to HD1.3?

NEW QUESTION 80
— Exhibit –

— Exhibit -Refer to the exhibit. A company uses a complex piece of client software that connects to one or more virtual servers
(VS) hosted on an LTM device. The client software is experiencing issues. An LTM Specialist must
determine the cause of the problem.
The LTM Specialist is seeing a client source IP of 168.210.232.5 in the tcpdump. However, the
client source IP is actually 10.123.17.12.
Why does the IP address of 10.123.17.12 fail to appear in the tcpdump?

NEW QUESTION 81
— Exhibit –

— Exhibit —
Refer to the exhibit.
Users receive an error when attempting to connect to the website https://website.com. The website has a DNS record of 195.56.67.90. The upstream ISP has confirmed that there is nothing wrong with the routing between the user and the LTM device.
The following tcpdump outputs have been captured:
External Vlan, filtered on IP 168.210.232.5
00:25:07.598519 IP 168.210.232.5.33159 > 195.56.67.90.https: S 1920647964:1920647964(0) win 8192 <mss
1450,nop,nop,sackOK>
00:25:07.598537 IP 195.56.67.90.https > 168.210.232.5.33159: S 2690691360:2690691360(0) ack
1920647965 win 4350 <mss 1460,sackOK,eol>
00:25:07.598851 IP 168.210.232.5.33160 > 195.56.67.90.https: S 2763858764:2763858764(0) win 8192 <mss
1450,nop,nop,sackOK>
00:25:07.598858 IP 195.56.67.90.https > 168.210.232.5.33160: S 1905576176:1905576176(0) ack
2763858765 win 4350 <mss 1460,sackOK,eol>
Internal Vlan, filtered on IP 168.210.232.5
00:31:46.171124 IP 168.210.232.5.33202 > 192.168.100.20.http: S 2389057240:2389057240(0) win 4380
<mss 1460,nop,wscale 0,sackOK,eol>
What is the problem?

NEW QUESTION 82
— Exhibit-



— Exhibit –
Refer to the exhibits.
An LTM Specialist is troubleshooting an application configured on an LTM device on a one-armed configuration. The application is NOT working through the LTM device but does work when accessed directly via the application servers. The virtual server
192.168.1.211:443 is configured to SNAT using the address 192.168.1.144 and references a pool with the member 192.168.10.80:443. No Client or Server SSL profiles are associated. The LTM Specialist has collected two traffic captures to help determine the issue.
What is the problem with the configuration on the LTM device?

NEW QUESTION 83
A failover event is recorded in the following log messages:
Jan 01 00:56:56 BIG-IP notice mcpd[5318]: 01070727:5: Pool /Common/my-pool member /Common/10.0.0.10:80 monitor status down.
Jan 01 00:56:56 BIG-IP notice sod[5855]: 010c0045:5: Leaving active, group score 10 peer group score 20.
Jan 01 00:56:56 BIG-IP notice sod[5855]: 010c0052:5: Standby for traffic group /Common/traffic-group-1.
Jan 01 00:56:56 BIG-IP notice sod[5855]: 010c0018:5: Standby
Jan 01 00:57:06 BIG-IP notice logger: /usr/bin/tmipsecd –tmmcount 4 ==> /usr/bin/bigstart stop racoon
What is the cause of the failover?

NEW QUESTION 84
A virtual server for a set of web services is constructed on an LTM device. The LTM Specialist has created an iRule and applied this iRule to the virtual server:
when HTTP_REQUEST {
switch [HTTP::uri] {
“/WS1/ws.jsp” {
log local0. “[HTTP::uri]-Redirected to JSP Pool”
pool JSP
}
default { log local0. “[HTTP::uri]-Redirected to Non-JSP Pool”
pool NonJSP
} } }
However, the iRule is NOT behaving as expected. Below is a snapshot of the log:
/WS1/ws.jsp-Redirected to JSP Pool /WS1/ws.jsp-Redirected to JSP Pool /WS1/ws.jsp-Redirected to JSP Pool /WS1/WS.jsp-Redirected to Non-JSP Pool /ws1/WS.jsp-Redirected to Non-JSP Pool /WS1/ws.jsp-Redirected to JSP Pool /ws1/ws.jsp-Redirected to Non-JSP Pool
What is the problem?

NEW QUESTION 85
What does the following iRule do?
when CLIENT_ACCEPTED {
if { [matchclass [IP::client_addr] equals WebClient1-Whitelist1] }{
#log local0. “Valid client IP: [IP::client_addr] – forwarding traffic”
#Pool WebClient1
} else {
log local0. “Invalid client IP: [IP::client_addr] – discarding”
discard
}
}

NEW QUESTION 86
— Exhibit –



— Exhibit —
Refer to the exhibits.
Users are able to access the application when connecting to the virtual server but are unsuccessful when connecting directly to the application servers. The LTM Specialist wants to allow direct access to the application servers.
Why are users unable to connect directly to the application servers?

NEW QUESTION 87
— Exhibit –

— Exhibit —
Refer to the exhibit.
An LTM Specialist has uploaded a qkview to F5 iHealth.
Within the GUI, what is the correct procedure to comply with the recommendation shown in the
exhibit?