Cisco 300-615 - Troubleshooting Cisco Data Center Infrastructure (300-615 DCIT) v1.1

The answer is Configure HSRP version 2 on Nexus7K-2 because Cisco Nexus and ACI forwarding depends on exact agreement between the devices participating in the feature. The scenario references HSRP; those technologies fail in predictable ways when required parameters do not match or when the required control-plane advertisement is absent. In DCIT troubleshooting, the engineer should identify the failed dependency, correct that dependency, and then verify the operational table that proves the fix. For example, vPC and EVPN checks focus on consistency, VNI/VRF bindings, peer-gateway behavior, and host-route advertisement; routing checks focus on neighbor state, MTU, timers, authentication, next-hop, and route preference. The selected answer addresses the dependency that blocks forwarding. The distractors are plausible because they touch related features, but they do not resolve the specific failure condition. Post-change validation should include protocol state, learned endpoint or route entries, and a traffic test across the affected path.

Cisco troubleshooting logic supports Set the bgp transport path-mtu-discovery attribute on both peers as the required fix. In this question the symptoms point to BGP, and the defect is best handled by correcting the exact control-plane or consistency condition. Nexus platforms can show interfaces or peers as configured while still refusing to forward traffic if a vPC Type-1 parameter, VLAN allowance, MTU, HSRP version, EVPN route, or routing attribute is wrong. Cisco methodology is to avoid broad resets unless the state machine is stuck; instead, correct the mismatched parameter and verify that the resulting operational state becomes stable. The other choices do not remove the root cause, or they modify a setting that is not used by the failing protocol exchange. After the change, the engineer should review the peer status, route or MAC table, and counters for drops or inconsistency messages. That sequence proves that the network fabric is fixed, not merely restarted.

Change the cables to fix physical connections is correct because the failure is tied to the UCS managed state of UCS, firmware, fabric interconnect. In Cisco UCS, policies are not advisory; they are the source from which fabric interconnects program adapters, boot targets, server identity, firmware, and external integrations. A mismatch between the policy and the actual hardware or upstream storage/network state can cause boot, discovery, KVM, firmware, or connectivity failures. The selected action addresses the object that UCS Manager uses to build the final operational configuration. The distractors either solve a different fault domain or bypass the policy model. A disciplined DCIT validation sequence is to check the fault code, the FSM history, the equipment inventory, the service profile association, and the relevant adapter or boot table. If those states are correct after the change, the UCS component should return to operable service without unnecessary reconfiguration.

Reset the DIMM is correct because the failure is tied to the UCS managed state of UCS, firmware. In Cisco UCS, policies are not advisory; they are the source from which fabric interconnects program adapters, boot targets, server identity, firmware, and external integrations. A mismatch between the policy and the actual hardware or upstream storage/network state can cause boot, discovery, KVM, firmware, or connectivity failures. The selected action addresses the object that UCS Manager uses to build the final operational configuration. The distractors either solve a different fault domain or bypass the policy model. A disciplined DCIT validation sequence is to check the fault code, the FSM history, the equipment inventory, the service profile association, and the relevant adapter or boot table. If those states are correct after the change, the UCS component should return to operable service without unnecessary reconfiguration.

Configure the pinning max-link as 2 is the valid corrective action because the failure described is a protocol or fabric state problem, not a generic connectivity issue. For LACP, FEX, Cisco troubleshooting expects the engineer to compare both endpoints of the relationship: vPC peers must agree on consistency parameters, HSRP peers must exchange hellos in the same VLAN and version context, OSPF/BGP peers must match the attributes required for stable adjacency, and VXLAN EVPN must advertise the correct host or prefix information. The selected option restores that required state. The other options either operate on the wrong layer, change a value that is not used to form the relationship, or would make the peer relationship less deterministic. A clean validation is to inspect the control-plane table first, then verify the forwarding table, and finally test end-to-end traffic. This is the Cisco-preferred approach because it avoids random changes and confirms that the fabric is forwarding based on correct protocol state.

Cisco troubleshooting logic supports the drag-and-drop mapping shown in the answer key as the required fix. In this question the symptoms point to DRAG, DROP, Drag, Not, and the defect is best handled by correcting the exact control-plane or consistency condition. Nexus platforms can show interfaces or peers as configured while still refusing to forward traffic if a vPC Type-1 parameter, VLAN allowance, MTU, HSRP version, EVPN route, or routing attribute is wrong. Cisco methodology is to avoid broad resets unless the state machine is stuck; instead, correct the mismatched parameter and verify that the resulting operational state becomes stable. The other choices do not remove the root cause, or they modify a setting that is not used by the failing protocol exchange. After the change, the engineer should review the peer status, route or MAC table, and counters for drops or inconsistency messages. That sequence proves that the network fabric is fixed, not merely restarted.