Free Cisco 350-801 Actual Exam Questions - Question 11 Discussion
mailboxes must be configured when the Cisco Unity Connection server is configured. Which action
accomplishes this task?
I think syncing users via AXL (option C) is the way to go since it directly accesses Cisco UCM's user data, making mailbox configuration automatic during setup. AXL is usually used for this kind of integration. C
Maybe D fits best since syncing with Active Directory is a common way to manage users and their mailboxes in Unity Connection. It automates user creation instead of manual input. A and B are more about protocols and integration rather than user syncing, and C doesn’t directly handle mailbox setup—it’s about accessing UCM data but wouldn’t create voicemail boxes by itself. So, using AD sync seems like the more straightforward method here.
I’d rule out A and D because allowing on-net to on-net or inbound CSS access to PSTN sounds like it could open doors for misuse. Between B and C, marking all patterns as off-net (C) seems too restrictive—you’d probably want to keep some calls on-net. So focusing on blocking off-net to off-net transfers (B) plus limiting inbound CSS to internal destinations only (E) seems more balanced. But is there any scenario where allowing some PSTN access inbound would actually be necessary without increasing fraud risk?
Maybe B and E make the most sense here. Blocking off-net to off-net transfers limits fraud routes, and restricting inbound CSS to internal destinations only helps prevent unauthorized PSTN access. A and C seem too extreme or risky for normal call flows, and D definitely sounds too open for inbound access. This combo feels like it balances security without breaking legit calls.
Yeah, totally agree with B and E since blocking off-net transfers and limiting inbound CSS cuts down fraud chances.
B, E also make sense because restricting off-net to off-net transfers blocks risky calls.
Option C and E make more sense to me. Marking all route patterns as off-net helps clearly separate external calls, which makes it easier to restrict risky transfers. Also, limiting inbound CSS to internal destinations only reduces the chances of unauthorized PSTN calls. A and D seem less secure since they allow more call paths that fraudsters could exploit.
It’s B and E for me. Prohibiting off-net to off-net transfers and restricting inbound CSS to internal only sounds like solid fraud prevention steps. Options A and D seem too open.