Try not to Miss these F5-Networks 201 bootcamp with brain dumps gives the Latest and 2022 refreshed killexams 201 mock exam with Actual 201 Test Questions for new subjects of F5-Networks 201 Exam. Practice our Real 201 Questions Improve your insight and finish your test with High Marks. We ensure your accomplishment in the Test Center, covering every last one of the subjects of the test and improving your Knowledge of the 201 test. Pass with a 100 percent guarantee with our right inquiries.

Exam Code: 201 Practice test 2022 by team
201 BIG-IP Administrator

This test is about network administrators, network operators, and network engineers a functional understanding of the BIG-IP system as it is commonly deployed in an application delivery network. The test introduces students to the BIG-IP system, its configuration objects, how it processes traffic, and how typical administrative and operational activities are performed. The test includes lecture, hands-on labs, interactive demonstrations, and discussions.

Exam Objectives

Describe the role of the BIG-IP system as a full proxy device in an application delivery network
Set up, start/restart/stop, license, and provision the BIG-IP system out-of-the-box
Create a basic network configuration on the BIG-IP system including VLANs and self IPs
Use the Configuration utility and TMSH to manage BIG-IP resources such as virtual servers, pools, pool members, nodes, profiles, and monitors
Create, restore from, and manage BIG-IP archives
View resource status, availability, and statistical information and use this information to determine how the BIG-IP system is currently processing traffic
Use profiles to manipulate the way the BIG-IP system processes traffic through a virtual server
Perform basic troubleshooting and problem determination activities including using the iHealth diagnostic tool
Support, and view traffic flow using TCPDUMP
Understand and manage user roles and partitions
Configure and manage a sync-failover device group with more than two members
Configure stateful failover using connection mirroring and persistence mirroring

Exam Contents

Getting started with the BIG-IP system
Traffic processing with BIG-IP Local Traffic Manager (LTM)
Using TMSH (TMOS Shell) command line interface
Using NATs and SNATs
Monitoring application health and managing object status
Modifying traffic behavior with profiles, including SSL offload and re-encryption
Modifying traffic behavior with persistence, including source address affinity and cookie persistence
Troubleshooting the BIG-IP system, including logging (local, high-speed, and legacy remote
logging), and using TCPDUMP
User roles and administrative partitions
vCMP concepts
Configuring high availability (including active/standby and connection and persistence mirroring)

Default admin/root accounts passwords are now expired by default on new installations. A discussion on this change of behavior is now available, and labs have been updated accordingly.
The Cookie persistence section and labs are no longer included in this exam. This content has been moved to the Configuring LTM curriculum.
A new chapter, Configuring and Managing a High Availability Environment (formerly in the Configuring LTM class) is now included in this exam.
The iRules chapter has been removed from this exam.

Setting Up the BIG-IP System

Introducing the BIG-IP System
Initially Setting Up the BIG-IP System
Configuring the Management Interface
Activating the Software License
Provisioning Modules and Resources
Importing a Device Certificate
Specifying BIG-IP Platform Properties
Configuring the Network
Configuring Network Time Protocol (NTP) Servers
Configuring Domain Name System (DNS) Settings
Configuring High Availability Options
Archiving the BIG-IP Configuration
Leveraging F5 Support Resources and Tools

Traffic Processing Building Blocks

Identifying BIG-IP Traffic Processing Objects
Configuring Virtual Servers and Pools
Load Balancing Traffic
Viewing Module Statistics and Logs
Using the Traffic Management Shell (TMSH)
Understanding the TMSH Hierarchical Structure
Navigating the TMSH Hierarchy
Managing BIG-IP Configuration State and Files
BIG-IP System Configuration State
Loading and Saving the System Configuration
Shutting Down and Restarting the BIG-IP System
Saving and Replicating Configuration Data (UCS and SCF)

Using NATs and SNATs

Address Translation on the BIG-IP System
Mapping IP Addresses with NATs
Solving Routing Issues with SNATs
Configuring SNAT Auto Map on a Virtual Server
Monitoring for and Mitigating Port Exhaustion

Monitoring Application Health

Introducing Monitors
Types of Monitors
Monitor Interval and Timeout Settings
Configuring Monitors
Assigning Monitors to Resources
Managing Pool, Pool Member, and Node Status
Using the Network Map

Modifying Traffic Behavior with Profiles

Introducing Profiles
Understanding Profile Types and Dependencies
Configuring and Assigning Profiles
Introducing SSL Offload and SSL Re-Encryption
Managing Object State

Modifying Traffic Behavior with Persistence

Understanding the Need for Persistence
Introducing Source Address Affinity Persistence
Managing Object State

Administering the BIG-IP System

Configuring Logging
Legacy Remote Logging
Introducing High Speed Logging (HSL)
High-Speed Logging Filters
HSL Configuration Objects
Configuring High Speed Logging
Using TCPDUMP on the BIG-IP System
Leveraging the BIG-IP iHealth System
Viewing BIG-IP System Statistics
Defining User Roles and Administrative Partitions
Leveraging vCMP

Configuring High Availability

Introducing Device Service Clustering (DSC)
Preparing to Deploy a DSC Configuration
Configuring DSC Communication Settings
Establishing Device Trust
Establishing a Sync-Failover Device Group
Synchronizing Configuration Data
Exploring Traffic Group Behavior
Understanding Failover Managers and Triggers
Achieving Stateful Failover with Mirroring

BIG-IP Administrator
F5-Networks Administrator information hunger
Killexams : F5-Networks Administrator information hunger - BingNews Search results Killexams : F5-Networks Administrator information hunger - BingNews Killexams : Early Inhaled Budesonide for the Prevention of Bronchopulmonary Dysplasia

Study Patients

Figure 1. Figure 1. Eligibility, Randomization, and Follow-up.

In case of a multiple-birth pregnancy, only one of the multiples (the second in birth order, when possible) was considered eligible for the study, to prevent a correlated data problem.

Infants with a gestational age of 23 weeks 0 days to 27 weeks 6 days and a chronologic age of 12 hours or less who required any form of positive-pressure support were eligible. Figure 1 shows the reasons for exclusion.

Study Oversight

The trial was approved by the research ethics board at University Hospital, Tübingen, and at each of the participating centers. Appropriate regulatory approvals and written informed consent from parents or guardians were obtained before randomization. All the authors vouch for the accuracy and completeness of the data and the fidelity of the report to the study protocol, which is available with the full text of this article at Metered-dose inhalers containing the study drugs were supplied free of charge by the manufacturer, Chiesi Farmaceutici, and Trudell Medical International supplied spacers (AeroChamber mini) free of charge; these companies had no role in the design or conduct of the trial, the analysis of the data, the reporting and interpretation of the results, or the writing of the manuscript.


A computer-generated randomization scheme with a fixed block size of 8 was used to assign infants, in a 1:1 ratio, to a study group, with stratification according to gestational age (23 weeks 0 days to 25 weeks 6 days vs. 26 weeks 0 days to 27 weeks 6 days). The manufacturer of the study drug received the sequence of study-drug assignments from a statistician at the coordinating center and prepared drug packages, each of which contained eight sequentially numbered metered-dose inhalers that were identical in appearance. Packages of coded inhalers containing the study drugs were delivered to each participating center to ensure concealment of randomization. Infants were considered to have been randomly assigned at the time of the first signing of a prescription for the study drug.

Study Design

To ensure that all the infants received the study drug within 24 hours after birth, eligible infants received the first dose within 12 hours after random assignment. Study drugs were administered by means of a metered-dose inhaler connected to a spacer. This spacer, which had a capacity of 110 ml, was filled with a sufficient amount of oxygen to keep the infant in the targeted oxygen-saturation range. For infants receiving mechanical ventilation, the spacer was inserted into the ventilator circuit close to the endotracheal tube. For infants receiving nasal respiratory support, the spacer was connected to a face mask.

The dose of budesonide was two puffs (200 μg per puff) administered every 12 hours in the first 14 days of life and one puff administered every 12 hours from day 15 until the last dose of the study drug had been administered. The placebo contained only hydrofluoroalkane propellant.

Study drugs were administered until infants no longer needed supplemental oxygen and positive-pressure support or reached a postmenstrual age of 32 weeks 0 days, regardless of ventilator status. Attending physicians could withhold or decrease doses of study drugs at their discretion. To minimize contamination, the study protocol strongly discouraged the use of open-label inhaled glucocorticoids. All other interventions were prescribed at the discretion of the local clinicians. No one involved in patient care or in the assessment and analysis of outcomes was aware of the individual study-group assignments before completion of the analysis.

Primary Outcome

The primary outcome was a composite of death or bronchopulmonary dysplasia at 36 weeks of postmenstrual age. Bronchopulmonary dysplasia was defined as the requirement for positive-pressure support, the requirement for supplemental oxygen at a fraction of inspired oxygen exceeding 0.30, or, in infants receiving low amounts of oxygen, an inability to maintain an oxygen-saturation value above 90% during a structured, short period of saturation monitoring coupled with gradual weaning from oxygen to ambient air (the oxygen-reduction test).17

Secondary Outcomes

Prespecified secondary outcomes were the following: death for any reason at 36 weeks of postmenstrual age; bronchopulmonary dysplasia (defined in the same way as for the primary outcome) in survivors at 36 weeks of postmenstrual age17; the duration of positive-pressure respiratory support or supplemental oxygen; ventriculomegaly with or without intraventricular hemorrhage18 (diagnosed on the basis of the worst finding on cranial ultrasonography performed at or before 36 weeks of postmenstrual age); patent ductus arteriosus requiring drug treatment or surgery; and intestinal perforation or necrotizing enterocolitis (diagnosed during surgery, at autopsy, or by a finding of pneumatosis intestinalis, hepatobiliary gas, or free intraperitoneal air on abdominal radiography).

Additional prespecified secondary outcomes were retinopathy of prematurity (stage 2 or higher according to the international classification19 or requiring treatment), culture-proven infections (defined as episodes of sepsis or meningitis confirmed by blood or cerebrospinal fluid culture growing bacteria, fungi, or viruses), increases in weight and head circumference from birth to day 28, the length of hospitalization, a need for reintubation after the last dose of study drug had been administered, and the occurrence of oral candidiasis requiring treatment, hyperglycemia requiring insulin treatment, or hypertension requiring treatment. The results of neurodevelopmental disability testing at 18 to 22 months of corrected age are not reported here.

Statistical Analysis

Assuming a rate of death or bronchopulmonary dysplasia of 50% in the placebo group, we calculated that 808 infants would have to be enrolled for the study to have 80% power (at a two-sided alpha level of 5%) to detect a 20% lower risk in the budesonide group. With an anticipated loss to follow-up, we aimed to recruit 850 infants.

We assessed the primary outcome by means of a Mantel–Haenszel chi-square test stratified according to gestational age (23 weeks 0 days to 25 weeks 6 days vs. 26 weeks 0 days to 27 weeks 6 days), at a two-sided alpha rate of 0.05. The analysis was performed on the basis of the intention-to-treat principle. We performed a secondary analysis using a logistic-regression model adjusted for gestational age, maternal age, family structure (single vs. two-parent family at the time of delivery), antenatal glucocorticoid use (yes vs. no), presence or absence of chorioamnionitis (defined histologically), intubation status, birth weight (<750 g vs. ≥750 g), sex, multiple vs. singleton gestation, and caffeine use (yes vs. no). The final model was checked for colinearities and interactions and includes, besides therapy, only factors with P values of less than 0.05. For the primary outcome, we also conducted prespecified analyses in subgroups defined according to intubation status, gestational age, and the presence or absence of chorioamnionitis.

Comparisons of secondary outcomes were performed with the use of stratified and nonstratified Cochran–Mantel–Haenszel tests for dichotomous outcomes. Continuous outcomes were checked for normal distribution and analyzed with the use of Student’s t-test and analysis of variance, with posterior tests if they were normally distributed and Wilcoxon and Kruskal–Wallis tests with posterior tests if they were nonnormally distributed.20 Censored data were analyzed with the use of Kaplan–Meier estimates and the log-rank test. Hazard ratios were calculated with the use of Cox regression. Two-sided P values of less than 0.05 were considered to indicate statistical significance. SAS software, version 9.2 (SAS Institute) was used for analyses.

An independent statistician conducted one planned interim analysis for efficacy after 50% of the infants had been enrolled; an external data and safety monitoring committee reviewed the analysis. A Haybittle–Peto stopping boundary was set at a P value of less than 0.001. The external data and safety monitoring committee reviewed safety data four times. After the last review, when patient enrollment had already been completed, the committee recommended that the study drugs be withheld because of a borderline significant between-group difference in the rate of death according to the data available for review at that time. However, at the time of this recommendation, study drugs had already been discontinued in all patients according to the protocol.

Sat, 11 Dec 2021 15:20:00 -0600 en text/html
201 exam dump and training guide direct download
Training Exams List