Key details for this exam, checked against the published exam outline
Each question shows the correct answer and an explanation of why it is right
Which two characteristics describe the default behavior of aggregate routes? (Choose two.)
The entire purpose of route aggregation is summarization --- replacing a set of more-specific contributing routes with a single, broader prefix advertised outward --- and this summarization inherently hides internal routing instability from external peers: if one of the underlying contributing /24 blocks within a summarized /16 flaps up and down due to a local link issue, external peers who only see the stable, unchanging /16 aggregate are completely insulated from that churn, since the aggregate itself remains active and advertised as long as at least one contributing route is present, regardless of how much internal fluctuation occurs among the individual contributors. This stability-hiding characteristic is one of the primary operational benefits that motivates using aggregate routes in the first place, confirming that statement as correct. Regarding next-hop behavior, official Juniper documentation is explicit and unambiguous: when an aggregate route is installed in the routing table, Junos assigns it a reject next hop by default, meaning traffic matching only the aggregate (and no more-specific contributor) is dropped and an ICMP unreachable message is returned to the source; a discard next hop is available only as an optional, explicitly configured alternative when silent dropping without ICMP notification is preferred, but it is not the default. Aggregate routes categorically do not advertise their individual contributing routes; suppressing those specific, more-granular prefixes from onward advertisement in favor of the single summary is the aggregate's defining function, directly contradicting the first statement. Reference topics: Junos Enterprise Routing -- Protocol Independent Routing, Default Reject Next Hop and Route Summarization Benefits.
Refer to Exhibit:

R1 is not responding to ICMP requests sent to the VIP address.
Referring to the exhibit, which command option would you configure on the virtual address to correct this problem?
In this configuration, R1's physical interface address (10.10.10.1) is different from the VRRP virtual IP address (10.100.100.1), meaning R1 is operating as a non-owner VRRP master --- it did not originate the virtual address as one of its own real interface addresses. By default, Junos VRRP masters that do not own the virtual address will forward transit traffic destined through that address but will not process or respond to traffic addressed directly to the VIP itself, such as ICMP echo requests, Telnet, or SSH sessions aimed at 10.100.100.1. This is deliberate default behavior intended to prevent ambiguity about which physical device is answering on behalf of a shared virtual identity. To allow the master to accept and respond to packets whose destination is the virtual address itself, the accept-data statement must be explicitly configured under the vrrp-group hierarchy. Once enabled, the elected master will process locally destined traffic sent to the VIP, resolving exactly the symptom described. The track option is used for interface or route-based priority adjustment to influence mastership, advertise-interval tunes the frequency of VRRP hello advertisements, and no-preempt prevents a higher-priority router from reclaiming mastership once a lower-priority router has taken over --- none of these affect whether the master processes traffic destined to the VIP. Reference topics: Junos Enterprise Routing -- High Availability, VRRP accept-data Behavior.
[Exhibit]

Click the Exhibit button.
A network has three Juniper Networks EX Series Switches connected together. No changes have been made to the default spanning-tree configuration.
Referring to the exhibit, which statement is correct about the root bridge?
Root bridge election is based on comparing each switch's full Bridge Identifier, which combines the bridge priority value with the switch's MAC address, with priority always evaluated first and MAC address serving strictly as a tiebreaker when two or more switches present identical priority values. In this scenario, the network has been left entirely at the default spanning-tree configuration, meaning every switch is operating at the standard IEEE and Junos default bridge priority of 32768; since all three switches share the exact same priority value, the comparison necessarily falls through to the MAC address tiebreak, where the switch with the numerically lowest MAC address wins the election. Comparing the three addresses shown --- 00:1a:2b:3c:4d:01, 00:1a:2b:3c:4d:02, and 00:1a:2b:3c:4d:03 --- Switch A's address is the lowest, since only the final octet differs and 01 is less than both 02 and 03, making Switch A the elected root bridge. RSTP uses the identical Bridge ID comparison mechanism as legacy STP for root election, so there is no special 'median MAC address' rule that applies uniquely under RSTP, making that distractor factually invalid regardless of protocol version. The election process also does not require any manual bridge priority configuration to complete; the default priority value is entirely sufficient on its own to allow a deterministic election to occur, since default priorities are still numerically comparable Bridge IDs. Reference topics: Junos Enterprise Switching -- Spanning Tree Protocols, Default Priority and MAC Address Tiebreaking.
You are configuring a GRE tunnel between Router A (192.168.1.1) and Router B (192.168.2.1) to connect two isolated networks. The tunnel interfaces (gr-0/0/0) need to support IPv4 traffic.
In this scenario, which configuration ensures the tunnel endpoints are correctly defined and reachable?
A functioning GRE tunnel interface in Junos requires, at minimum, both a tunnel source address and a tunnel destination address configured together under the tunnel statement of the gr- logical unit, since these two values together define the outer, delivery-layer IP header that will encapsulate every passenger packet sent through the tunnel; the source identifies which of the router's own addresses will originate the encapsulated traffic, and the destination identifies the remote tunnel endpoint the encapsulated traffic must be routed toward across the underlying IP network. The first option correctly supplies both required values in a single, complete statement --- source 192.168.1.1 (Router A's own address) and destination 192.168.2.1 (Router B's address) --- fully defining the tunnel's endpoints and ensuring the encapsulation and route-resolution process can succeed. The fourth option supplies only the destination and omits the source entirely, which is an incomplete configuration; without an explicit source, Junos cannot always reliably determine which local address to use for encapsulation, particularly on multi-address or multi-interface routers, and the tunnel configuration is left non-deterministic or non-functional as shown. The second option enables the IPv6 protocol family on the tunnel's logical unit, which is irrelevant to a scenario explicitly requiring IPv4 passenger traffic support. The third option attempts to assign a family inet address directly using one of the underlying tunnel endpoint addresses, which conflates the tunnel's own transport addressing with logical-unit protocol addressing and does not by itself establish the required source/destination tunnel definition. Reference topics: Junos Enterprise Routing -- Tunneling, Configuring GRE Tunnel Source and Destination.
[Exhibit]

Click the Exhibit button.
You run the show ospf database command and you see a Router LSA marked with an asterisk.
Referring to the exhibit, what is the significance of this result?
In the output of show ospf database, Junos marks every self-originated link-state advertisement with an asterisk immediately preceding the LSA's link-state ID. A self-originated LSA is one that was created and flooded by the router on which the command is being executed, as opposed to an LSA that was received from and originated by a neighboring router elsewhere in the area. In this exhibit, the asterisked Router LSA has an ID of 10.101.100.0 and an Advertising Router value of the same 10.101.100.0, confirming that this particular Router LSA describes the local device's own links, area membership, and interface costs, and that the local router itself flooded this LSA into the area's link-state database. This distinction matters operationally because when troubleshooting OSPF topology or SPF calculation issues, engineers frequently need to isolate their own router's advertised state from the states advertised by every other router in the area; the asterisk provides an immediate, unambiguous visual cue for that separation without needing to cross-reference the router's own ID separately. It has no relationship to designated router or backup designated router status --- DR/BDR roles are indicated elsewhere in interface-level output, not through the asterisk convention in the LSA database dump, and a router that is neither DR nor BDR still self-originates and flags its own Router LSA the same way. Reference topics: Junos Enterprise Routing -- OSPF, Interpreting the OSPF Link-State Database.
65 questions covering all exam domains, starting from $20
Exam domains verified against: Official Juniper JN0-352 exam guide, last checked September 2026.
Learn bridging components, frame processing, VLAN ports, tagging, native and voice VLANs, and inter-VLAN routing configuration on Junos platforms. These concepts underpin your ability to segment networks and manage traffic within enterprise switching environments.
Sample question from this domain above: Q5
Understand STP and RSTP concepts including port roles, states, BPDUs, and convergence behaviour. Configure and troubleshoot spanning tree to prevent loops and ensure redundant switch connections work properly in enterprise networks.
Master BPDU protection, loop protection, root protection, port security with MAC limiting, DHCP snooping, Dynamic ARP Inspection, IP source guard, MACsec and storm control. Apply firewall filters at Layer 2 to protect switch infrastructure from common attacks.
Work with static routes, aggregate routes, generated routes, martian addresses, routing instances and RIB groups. Configure load balancing and filter-based forwarding to distribute traffic and implement policy-based routing without relying on dynamic protocols.
Sample question from this domain above: Q1
Learn OSPF operation, link-state databases, packet types, router IDs, adjacencies, designated and backup designated routers, area types and LSAs. Configure areas and interfaces, apply routing policies, and use troubleshooting tools to verify OSPF behaviour in enterprise networks.
Understand IS-IS PDUs, TLVs, adjacencies, levels, designated intermediate systems and metrics. Configure IS-IS levels and interfaces, manage adjacencies, apply routing policies and apply troubleshooting techniques to diagnose IS-IS problems in multi-level networks.
Sample question from this domain above: Q2
Master BGP operation, message types, attributes and route selection logic. Work with internal and external BGP peers, configure groups and neighbors, apply routing policies to control advertisements and manipulate path selection in large interconnected networks.
Sample question from this domain above: Q4
Learn IP tunneling concepts with GRE and IP-IP encapsulation. Configure tunnels for site-to-site connectivity, understand tunnel applications and requirements, and use standard troubleshooting tools to verify tunnel operation and diagnose connectivity issues.
Sample question from this domain above: Q3
Understand LAGs, redundant trunk groups, virtual chassis, graceful restart, GRES, NSR, NSB, BFD, VRRP and ISSU. Configure redundancy mechanisms to eliminate single points of failure and enable non-disruptive software upgrades in mission-critical enterprise networks.
Common questions about the exam itself