Juniper Updated JN0-481 Exam Questions and Answers by arwen

In EVPN multihoming, the Ethernet Segment Identifier (ESI) is the mandatory identifier used to represent a multihomed Ethernet segment—for example, a server or downstream switch that is dual-homed to two leaf devices using a single logical LAG/port-channel. By assigning the same ESI to the participating leaf-facing interfaces, the fabric recognizes those links as belonging to one Ethernet segment and can apply EVPN multihoming procedures consistently across the pair.

A key outcome of EVPN multihoming is loop prevention for multi-attached Layer 2 domains. EVPN uses the Ethernet segment concept (identified by the ESI) along with Designated Forwarder (DF) election to ensure that only the appropriate device forwards BUM (broadcast, unknown unicast, multicast) traffic toward the multihomed segment, avoiding duplicate forwarding and L2 loops. In addition, ESI-based multihoming supports resilient forwarding behavior during failures (for example, link or node loss) while maintaining correct advertisement and convergence in the EVPN control plane.

Therefore, among the provided options, the purpose that best matches how ESI is used operationally is to prevent loops within a LAG/multihomed connection, which is fundamental to EVPN-VXLAN data center designs on Junos v24.4 leaf devices and is also explicitly supported by Apstra when modeling ESI-based dual-homing.

Verified Juniper sources (URLs):

https://www.juniper.net/documentation/us/en/software/nce/evpn-lag-multihoming-guide/topics/concept/evpn-lag-guide-introduction.html

https://www.juniper.net/documentation/us/en/software/nce/evpn-lag-multihoming-guide/topics/task/evpn-lag-guide-esi-types-lacp.html

https://www.juniper.net/documentation/us/en/software/junos/evpn/topics/topic-map/evpn-mh-df-election.html

In Apstra 5.1, an IBA probe is a defined analytics pipeline that applies to a scoped set of graph objects (here, interfaces) and evaluates telemetry against logic defined in its processors. The exhibit shows a probe that consumes Interface Counters Average and then applies a Range processor. In the processor configuration, the Anomalous Range is set to “greater than 1,000,000” (bytes per second–equivalent for ~1 Mbps depending on the probe’s metric definition), and Raise Anomaly is set to True. Therefore, when ge-0/0/5 receives an average traffic level above the configured threshold, the probe’s condition evaluates as anomalous and Apstra raises a probe anomaly for that interface. That makes statement A correct.

When probe anomalies are raised, Apstra surfaces them in the blueprint’s Analytics area because they are analytics-derived findings (as opposed to configuration drift or deployment workflow issues). As a result, the blueprint’s Analytics tab indicator changes state (commonly to red with a badge count) to signal active analytics anomalies requiring attention. That makes statement B correct.

This event is not classified as a service anomaly (which is associated with higher-level service intent/assurance objects) unless separately mapped by policy/logic, and it does not primarily drive the Active tab indicator, which is focused on operational state views rather than being the primary alert surface for IBA probe anomalies.

In Apstra 5.1, templates are organized by template type, and the Create Blueprint screen can filter the template list by those types. A five-stage Clos design in Apstra is represented as a pod-based template (multi-pod fabric with an additional tier such as super-spines to interconnect pods). Because of that, a five-stage template will only appear in the template selector when the Pod Based filter is chosen. If the filter is set to Rack Based or Collapsed, Apstra hides pod-based templates because those types correspond to different topology classes: rack-based aligns with a three-stage leaf–spine pod, while collapsed aligns with a spine-less topology pattern.

This behavior is by design to prevent selecting an incompatible template for the intended topology. The template name itself does not need to contain “five-stage”; Apstra determines its type from how the template was created and stored in the catalog. Also, five-stage templates are not limited to Freeform blueprints—five-stage is a data center fabric topology choice, and it is supported within the data center reference design workflows when the appropriate template type is selected.

So, to make the five-stage template visible and selectable, choose Pod Based in the template filter.

In Juniper Apstra 5.1, the Event Log is a centralized record used for auditing and operational visibility. It includes audit events (user/system actions) and anomaly-related alerts (events generated when Apstra detects abnormal conditions). In Apstra documentation, anomaly entries are explicitly treated as “Alert” records with high severity, meaning the Event Log is a valid place to review anomaly notifications and their associated details. Therefore, the statement that the Event Log stores alerts for anomalies is correct.

The other options do not match the Event Log function. Viewing a device’s configuration is handled in device configuration and blueprint operational views, not as the primary purpose of the Event Log. Export behavior, where supported, is described for formats such as CSV rather than PDF, and exporting dashboards is a separate capability from event logging. Finally, while worker nodes are used to offload operational services (such as off-box agents and IBA components), the Event Log is a platform logging feature exposed through the controller UI/API rather than something described as “running on the worker node” as its defining trait.

Verified Juniper sources (URLs):

https://www.juniper.net/documentation/us/en/software/apstra5.1/apstra-user-guide/topics/topic-map/event-log.html

https://www.juniper.net/documentation/us/en/software/apstra5.0/apstra-user-guide/topics/topic-map/event-log.html

https://www.juniper.net/documentation/us/en/software/apstra5.1/apstra-user-guide/topics/topic-map/syslog-config.html