FCSS_SDW_AR-7.6 Sample Questions Answers

One SD-WAN rule is defined with application categories as the destination → The diagnose output shows application control matches such as Microsoft.Portal, Operational.Technology, and Social.Media, confirming that SD-WAN rules are using application categories as destinations.

UDP traffic destined to the subnet 10.22.0.0/24 matches a policy route → The first entry (id=1) shows protocol=17 (UDP) with destination 10.22.0.0/24, confirming this traffic is handled by a policy route instead of an SD-WAN rule.

When SD-WAN load balancing is required with link quality awareness, FortiOS relies on SLA-based strategies. These strategies evaluate link performance using performance SLAs (latency, jitter, packet loss, MOS) and then make forwarding decisions accordingly.

Option A is correct.

In FortiOS 7.6, when an SLA-based SD-WAN rule has load balancing enabled, FortiGate distributes traffic only across the members that meet the SLA targets. Any member that is out of SLA is excluded from load balancing. This behavior ensures that traffic is not forwarded over degraded links while still allowing load distribution across healthy paths.

Option C is correct.

The lowest cost (SLA) strategy is an SLA-based strategy that considers link quality while also allowing SD-WAN load balancing. When multiple members meet the SLA requirements and have equal cost, FortiGate can load balance traffic across them using the configured hash mode. This makes the lowest cost SLA strategy suitable when both link quality and load balancing are required.

Why the other options are incorrect:

Option B is incorrect because the best quality strategy is designed to select the single best-performing link based on SLA metrics. It does not support SD-WAN load balancing across multiple links.

Option D is incorrect because the best quality strategy does not support load balancing at all, so the statement about round-robin hash mode is invalid.

Therefore, the two correct facts to consider are A and C.

In FortiOS 7.6, when a Performance SLA probe mode is set to Prefer Passive, FortiGate attempts to measure link performance using passive monitoring first, based on real user traffic. Only when passive monitoring is not possible does FortiGate temporarily fall back to active probing.

With Prefer Passive, FortiGate passively monitors TCP traffic flowing through the SD-WAN member to calculate SLA metrics such as latency, jitter, and packet loss. This behavior directly matches option A.

During passive monitoring, FortiGate relies on observed traffic to infer link health. Because no synthetic probes are sent, a completely dead link (with no traffic passing) cannot be detected by the SLA during passive mode. As a result, dead members may not be immediately detected, which makes option D correct.

Option B is incorrect because there is no fixed 3-minute timer defined in FortiOS 7.6 that forces a return from active probing back to passive monitoring.

Option C is incorrect because passive SLA monitoring is based on TCP traffic, not ICMP traffic. ICMP is used for active probing, not passive monitoring.

Option E is incorrect because traffic subject to passive SLA monitoring cannot be offloaded to hardware. Passive SLA measurement requires software inspection of packets, which prevents NPU offloading.

Therefore, the two correct observable impacts of configuring the probe mode as Prefer Passive are A and D.

The described design is a multi-region SD-WAN architecture, where:

Each region has its own dual-hub ADVPN domain

Most traffic is intra-region

Inter-region traffic is limited and controlled

Spokes can be single-hub or dual-hub, depending on size and redundancy requirements

According to Fortinet’s SD-WAN Architecture for Enterprise guidance, when deploying multiple ADVPN regions, eBGP is the recommended routing protocol between regions. Each region operates as an independent routing domain (typically iBGP within the region), while eBGP is used to exchange routes between regional hubs. This approach:

Prevents excessive route reflection and scaling issues

Provides clear administrative boundaries between regions

Improves stability and scalability in large global deployments

Matches the exact traffic pattern described (high intra-region, low inter-region traffic)

This is explicitly documented in Fortinet guidance for “Using eBGP between regions with intra-region ADVPN”, which confirms that the architecture described in the question is valid and recommended when eBGP is used between regions.

Why the other options are incorrect:

Option B is incorrect because FortiOS does not impose a hard “four-hub” architectural limit in the described regional model. Each region has its own hubs, not a single flat multihub domain.

Option C is incomplete. While FortiManager Overlay Orchestrator can help operationally, it is not the key architectural requirement that makes this design valid. The question asks what makes the plan correct from a design standpoint, not a tooling standpoint.

Option D is incorrect because FortiOS fully supports mixed spoke connectivity within the same region (some spokes single-hub, others dual-hub), which is a common enterprise SD-WAN design.

Therefore, the correct and documented conclusion is that the plan is possible and eBGP should be used as the routing protocol between regions, which corresponds to Answer A.

By default, local-out traffic does not use SD-WAN → FortiGate normally sends local-out traffic (e.g., DNS, NTP, FortiGuard updates) directly through its interfaces without applying SD-WAN rules.

You must configure each local-out feature individually to use SD-WAN → To steer local-out traffic via SD-WAN, you must explicitly configure the desired local-out features (e.g., DNS, FortiGuard, CAPWAP) to use SD-WAN rules.

For FortiGate to steer traffic using SD-WAN rules, two foundational elements must be in place: available WAN paths (underlay links) and firewall policies that allow traffic to reach the SD-WAN interface.

Underlay links (Option B) are mandatory because SD-WAN operates by selecting among multiple WAN transports (for example, broadband, MPLS, LTE, or IPsec tunnels). These links are configured as SD-WAN members and form the physical or logical paths over which traffic can be steered. Without underlay links, SD-WAN has no paths to evaluate or select.

Firewall policies (Option E) are also mandatory because FortiGate only processes and forwards traffic that is explicitly permitted by a firewall policy. When SD-WAN is enabled, firewall policies must reference the SD-WAN interface or SD-WAN zone as the outgoing interface. If no such policy exists, traffic will not be forwarded and SD-WAN rules will never be evaluated.

Why the other options are incorrect:

Security profiles (Option A) are optional and relate to inspection, not SD-WAN steering.

Overlay links (Option C) are used in specific designs such as ADVPN or hub-and-spoke overlays, but SD-WAN can steer traffic without overlays (for example, DIA-only designs).

Traffic shaping (Option D) is not required for SD-WAN decision-making; it is an optional optimization feature.

Therefore, the two required features that must be configured before FortiGate can steer traffic according to SD-WAN rules are underlay links and firewall policies, which correspond to B and E.

In the SD-WAN GUI, the absence of members in a zone is visually represented, and the Fortinet guide confirms:

"If a zone such as overlay-factories contains no members, it will be displayed as empty in the SD-WAN GUI. This may occur when the zone is reserved for future expansion, or if members have been temporarily removed for maintenance or reconfiguration. Traffic cannot be steered via an empty zone until at least one SD-WAN member is added."

Such visual cues help operators quickly assess configuration status and readiness.

In FortiOS 7.6, static routes can reference either:

an SD-WAN zone (for example, virtual-wan-link or a user-defined SD-WAN zone), or

a specific SD-WAN member interface that belongs to that zone.

However, FortiOS enforces a routing constraint to avoid ambiguity during route resolution. Two static routes cannot have the same destination prefix if one points to an SD-WAN zone and the other points to an SD-WAN member within that zone. This would create an overlapping and conflicting forwarding decision.

Therefore, if you configure:

one static route that references an SD-WAN zone, and

another static route that references an SD-WAN member belonging to that same zone,

the destination subnets of the two static routes must be different.

Why the other options are incorrect:

Option A is incorrect because FortiOS does allow static routes that reference individual SD-WAN members.

Option B is incorrect because static routes can reference SD-WAN zones.

Option D is incorrect because static routing decisions in FortiOS are based on destination prefixes, not source prefixes.

Thus, the correct answer is C.

Rules template → Defines the SD-WAN rules for traffic steering.

BGP template → Configures dynamic routing for overlay tunnels.

IPsec tunnel template → Builds the IPsec VPN tunnels from the spoke to the hubs.

The rule is in priority mode with HUB1-VPN1 (seq 4) as the first preferred member, HUB1-VPN2 second, and HUB1-VPN3 third. Latency itself does not cause HUB1-VPN3 to become preferred unless a higher-priority member fails SLA. If HUB1-VPN1’s latency exceeds the SLA threshold (here simulated by latency reaching 200 ms), FortiGate stops using it and moves down the priority list. That is when HUB1-VPN3 could become the active path.

The SD-WAN rule (config service edit 1) is configured with set mode priority. This means the rule selects the best interface based on a defined performance metric, as opposed to a simple static priority or SLA. The event log (image_41cfb5.png) shows Metric latency and Message Service prioritized by performance metric will be redirected in sequence order. This indicates that the rule is using latency to determine the preferred member. Given that the log message is about a change, and the most logical reason for a change in a priority mode is that a different member is now the best performer, it implies that the latency on port2 has become lower than that on port1.

The log message Service prioritized by performance metric will be redirected in sequence order confirms that FortiGate is changing the member being used for this service. Because the mode is priority, FortiGate dynamically selects the member that currently meets the best performance criteria, which in this case is latency. The log implies a new member has been selected as the most optimal, and with the default configuration, the members are sorted based on their performance, so the outgoing interface list is effectively updated to prefer the new best-performing member (port2).

The implicit SD-WAN rule serves as the final catch-all. Per Fortinet:

"Sessions matching the implicit SD-WAN rule do not have an SD-WAN service id, as they are not associated with any specific user-defined SD-WAN rule. Additionally, this occurs only when traffic fails to match any entry in the policy route table. This default handling guarantees connectivity while minimizing the risk of blackholed traffic."

Administrators can observe this in diagnostic outputs for troubleshooting.

The hub must send additional paths to spokes (set additional-path send).

The hub must treat each spoke as a route-reflector client so spoke routes are reflected to other spokes.

The hub must specify how many additional paths to advertise (set adv-additional-path ).

The command shown in the exhibit is:

diagnose sys sdwan service 4 3

This command displays the runtime state of SD-WAN rule ID 3 on the device. The output explicitly shows:

Service(3) which confirms the SD-WAN rule being evaluated is rule number 3

Members(9) which indicates that nine SD-WAN members are associated with this rule

The listed members include multiple IPsec tunnel interfaces such as HUB1-VPN1, HUB1-VPN2, HUB1-VPN3, HUB2-VPN1, HUB2-VPN2, and HUB2-VPN3, which is characteristic of a spoke device connecting to multiple hubs in a hub-and-spoke ADVPN topology, as defined in the FCSS SD-WAN 7.6 architecture.

Option B is incorrect because, although members are listed under different interfaces, the output does not indicate SD-WAN zones. Zones are shown only in configuration output, not in this diagnostic command.

Option C is incorrect because this is not a hub device. The presence of multiple hub tunnels as SD-WAN members indicates a spoke role. Additionally, the output does not confirm the number of established ADVPN shortcuts.

Option D is incorrect because the output clearly references SD-WAN rule 3, not rule 4, and it does not state that exactly three shortcut tunnels are allowed.

Therefore, the correct conclusion is that this is a spoke device and SD-WAN rule 3 is configured with nine members, which matches option A.

For SD-WAN deployments that span multiple regions—where most traffic is intra-region and there is no requirement for inter-region ADVPN—the best practice is to use IBGP with BGP on loopback interfaces for routing within each region and EBGP between the regions. This approach ensures robust and scalable routing, isolates regional routing domains, and enables policy control at region boundaries. BGP on loopback is preferred for its reliability and flexibility, as it enables peering that is not tied to specific physical interfaces. EBGP between regions allows each region to maintain independent routing policies and summarization, optimizing performance and manageability. By separating IBGP (intra-region) and EBGP (inter-region), you create a modular architecture that scales easily and simplifies fault isolation and troubleshooting.

The router policy explicitly denies traffic with source 10.0.1.128/25 (which includes 10.0.1.130) and destination 128.66.0.0/24 (which includes 128.66.0.125). Even though SD-WAN service 4 shows members (port1 and port2) alive and available for this traffic, the router policy is evaluated first and blocks it. Therefore, FortiGate drops the traffic flow.

Your requirements map to two key MSSP goals described in the FCSS SD-WAN 7.6 blueprint patterns:

Delegate as much administration and management as possible to the MSSPThis is best achieved when the hub security and SD-WAN control point is located on the MSSP premises, because the MSSP can centrally operate the core enforcement and overlay control. Both option B (dedicated hub at MSSP) and option D (shared hub at MSSP with customer isolation) meet this requirement.

Each site must maintain direct internet access (DIA) and be secure, with significant site-to-site trafficIn Fortinet SD-WAN MSSP designs, spokes can still use local breakout for DIA while also building secure overlays for inter-site traffic. Placing the hub at the MSSP enables centralized security services and scalable inter-site connectivity management while preserving DIA where required. Options B and D support this operating model.

Why the other options do not best match:

A includes a dedicated hub on the customer premises, which reduces how much the MSSP can centralize and operate from its own environment, so it does not maximize delegation.

C places both hub and spokes on the customer premises. While the MSSP can manage using a dedicated ADOM, this blueprint does not align as strongly with “delegate installation and management” to the MSSP as the designs where the hub is hosted and operated from the MSSP premises.

Therefore, the two MSSP deployment blueprints that address your requirements are B and D.