SkillTestPro | CCNP Collaboration 350-801 CLCOR Practice Test 11

CCNP Collaboration 350-801 CLCOR Practice Test 11 (Hard) - Globalized Call Routing - Route Patterns, Route Groups, and Route Lists

CCNP Collaboration Exam Questions

1 / 10

Which statement correctly describes the relationship between route patterns, route lists, and route groups in Cisco Unified Communications Manager's globalized call routing model?

A route pattern bypasses route lists and route groups entirely and connects directly to a physical port

A route pattern, route list, and route group are simply three different names for the exact same identical configuration object, though this is not generally recommended, which does not align with best practices

Route groups are used only to assign ringtones to matching directory numbers

A route pattern matches dialed digits and points to a route list, which contains an ordered set of route groups, each of which contains an ordered set of gateways or trunks to attempt in sequence

Route lists and route groups are only used for internal calls and have no role in external PSTN routing

A route group points to a route list, which in turn points to a route pattern, reversing the normal relationship entirely

2 / 10

Which purpose does a route group serve within the globalized call routing model?

It defines an ordered list of gateways or trunks that can be used to route a call, allowing CUCM to attempt them in sequence if an earlier device in the list is unavailable

It defines the ringtone melody played for calls matching a particular route pattern

It defines the wallpaper image displayed on phones associated with a particular route pattern, based on standard platform behavior, which is inconsistent with expected behavior

It defines the physical rack location of the voice gateway hardware

It defines the color coding used for reporting purposes only

It defines the font used to display route pattern names in the administration GUI

3 / 10

Which globalized routing design principle allows a single route pattern using the +E.164 format to be reused across multiple sites, each with its own local PSTN breakout?

Removing device pools entirely so no site-specific resolution is possible in the design

Requiring every site's phones to use a completely different numbering format from every other site

Creating a completely separate, differently formatted route pattern for every single site in the deployment, under normal operating conditions, regardless of the platform version in use, which is not the standard approach

Disabling route groups entirely so every site shares one single physical gateway with no local breakout

Using a local route group associated with each site's device pool, so the same route list resolves to a different, site-appropriate route group depending on the originating device's location

Assigning the same physical gateway hardware to every site regardless of geographic location

4 / 10

Which outcome would occur if all gateways within a route group's ordered list are unreachable when a call attempts to route through that group?

CUCM would automatically reroute the call to a random employee's personal cell phone

CUCM would automatically convert the call into a text message to the dialed number

CUCM would move on to the next route group within the route list (if one exists) or, if none remain, the call would fail with a reorder tone or unreachable indication to the caller

CUCM would automatically create a new gateway on the fly to complete the call

CUCM would automatically extend the call's ring time indefinitely with no failure indication

CUCM would automatically bill the call to a different department regardless of gateway status, in most deployment scenarios, in a properly maintained environment, based on standard platform behavior

5 / 10

Which design consideration determines the order in which route groups should be listed within a route list for a site that has both a primary local PSTN gateway and a backup gateway at another location?

Route groups should always be listed in the order they were created regardless of location or cost

Route groups should always list the backup gateway first to test its availability on every call

The primary local gateway's route group should typically be listed first to minimize cost and latency, with the backup gateway's route group listed afterward to be used only if the primary is unavailable

Route groups should always be listed randomly to distribute load evenly with no preference for locality

Route groups should always be listed with the highest-numbered IP address first regardless of location

Route groups should always be listed in alphabetical order by gateway hostname with no regard to location, based on standard platform behavior, in accordance with common design practices, in most deployment scenarios

6 / 10

Which troubleshooting step would be appropriate if calls intended for a specific site's local PSTN breakout are instead routing through a different site's gateway, despite a correctly configured local route group?

Assume local route groups are a deprecated feature no longer supported by the platform

Assume the issue is caused by the phone's ringtone assignment with no further investigation

Assume the issue is unrelated to device pool configuration and only check the office's lighting, under normal operating conditions, which is inconsistent with expected behavior, which is inconsistent with expected behavior, regardless of the platform version in use

Immediately replace the site's gateway hardware as the first troubleshooting step

Assume the issue is caused by the phase of the moon

Verify that the originating device's device pool is correctly associated with that site's local route group, since an incorrect device pool assignment would cause the local route group to resolve to the wrong site's gateway

7 / 10

Which statement accurately describes why route lists support multiple route groups rather than pointing directly to a single route group?

Supporting multiple ordered route groups allows a single route pattern to have automatic failover across different gateways or trunk paths without requiring separate route patterns for each failover scenario

Route lists support multiple route groups so that each group can be assigned a different ringtone for reporting

Route lists support multiple route groups only because CUCM requires a minimum of three groups per list at all times

Route lists support multiple route groups only to satisfy a licensing requirement with no bearing on failover

Route lists support multiple route groups purely for cosmetic reporting purposes with no functional effect on call routing, which is inconsistent with expected behavior, under typical configuration conditions

Route lists support multiple route groups so that calls can be duplicated and sent to every group simultaneously

8 / 10

Which factor would most influence whether a design team creates a dedicated route group for international calls separate from the route group used for local and long-distance calls?

The need to apply different cost management, class of service restrictions, or gateway/trunk selection specifically for international traffic without affecting local and long-distance routing

The brand of coffee served at the site where the gateway is physically located

The font used to label the route group in internal documentation

The number of parking spaces available near the gateway's physical location

The color scheme applied to the route group's name in the administration GUI

The average outdoor temperature at the gateway's physical location

9 / 10

Which combination of design elements would allow an organization to centralize PSTN breakout at a single hub site while still providing automatic local failover if the hub site's gateway becomes unreachable?

A design that requires manual reconfiguration of every branch site's dial plan during a hub outage

A design that disables all PSTN breakout entirely whenever the hub site's gateway is unreachable

A design that assumes the hub site's gateway will never become unreachable and plans no failover at all

A route list referencing only the hub site's route group with no backup route group configured at all

A route list referencing the hub site's route group first, followed by a backup route group pointing to a secondary gateway (potentially at a branch site), so calls automatically fail over if the hub gateway is unavailable

A design that removes route lists entirely so every branch connects directly to the hub with no failover path, under typical configuration conditions, which is rarely the correct choice, which is not the standard approach, which does not align with best practices

10 / 10

Which statement accurately explains why the combination of route patterns, route lists, and route groups is considered more scalable than configuring each gateway selection decision directly within individual route patterns?

Configuring gateway selection directly within each route pattern would always be faster to administer than using route lists and route groups

Route lists and route groups only exist for historical compatibility and provide no scalability benefit in modern deployments

Separating routing logic into reusable route lists and route groups allows administrators to change gateway priority or add/remove gateways in one place, without needing to modify every individual route pattern that relies on that routing path

Scalability is determined solely by the number of phones in the deployment and has no relationship to routing configuration structure

Route patterns, route lists, and route groups are simply three different names for the exact same identical configuration object with no scalability difference

Using route lists and route groups always requires more total configuration objects than configuring gateway selection directly in every route pattern, with no offsetting benefit, in a properly maintained environment, which is not the standard approach

Your score is

The average score is 0%