Free Cisco 300-730 SVPN Actual Exam Questions - Question 12 Discussion

Question No. 12
A company's remote locations connect to the data centers via MPLS. A new request requires that
unicast and multicast traffic that exits in the remote locations be encrypted. Which non-tunneled
technology should be used to satisfy this requirement?
Select one option, then reveal solution.
US
AR
Andre R.
2026-02-20

Makes sense that GETVPN (D) fits since it’s designed for multicast encryption without tunnels. FlexVPN and DMVPN both create tunnels, so they’re out for a “non-tunneled” ask.

0
SZ
Sam Z.
2026-02-18

Option D sounds right since GETVPN handles multicast without creating separate tunnels, which fits the question’s “non-tunneled” part. SSL (A) is mostly for web traffic, and DMVPN (C) definitely uses tunnels. FlexVPN (B) is also tunnel-based. So if they want encryption on multicast and unicast but no tunnels, GETVPN seems like the only tech that does both.

0
SZ
Sam Z.
2026-02-15

D vs B? I’m pretty sure GETVPN (D) fits since it encrypts both unicast and multicast without tunneling, which is what they want. FlexVPN (B) usually relies on tunnels, so that rules it out for a non-tunneled solution. SSL (A) is mostly for unicast over TCP and wouldn’t handle multicast here. DMVPN (C) uses tunnels too, so not suitable. So, GETVPN seems to be the only option designed for multicast encryption in an MPLS setup without adding tunnels.

0
RW
Ravi W.
2026-01-23

It’s D because GETVPN secures multicast and unicast without extra tunnels, unlike others.

0
NL
Noah L.
2026-01-15

Maybe D fits since GETVPN is designed for multicast encryption without creating tunnels, unlike DMVPN or FlexVPN which rely on tunneling. SSL doesn’t handle multicast well either.

0
NL
Noah L.
2026-01-15

Okay, this one’s tricky because it specifically says non-tunneled and something that works well with multicast. I think D. GETVPN fits best since it handles multicast traffic without tunneling, unlike the others which are mostly tunnel-based VPNs. Anyone else seeing it that way?

0