ExamTopics Logo
Mail Us[email protected]
Menu
Cisco Discussions
exam questions

Exam 300-410 All Questions

View all questions & answers for the 300-410 exam
Go to Exam

Exam 300-410 topic 1 question 390 discussion

Actual exam question from Cisco's 300-410
Question #: 390
Topic #: 1
[All 300-410 Questions]



Refer to the exhibit. The administrator configured the network devices for end-to-end reachability, but the ASBRs are not propagating routes to each other. Which set of configurations resolves this issue?

  • A. router bgp 100
    neighbor 10.1.1.1 next-hop-self
    neighbor 10.1.2.2 next-hop-self
    neighbor 10.1.3.3 next-hop-self
  • B. router bgp 100
    neighbor 10.1.1.1 update-source Loopback0
    neighbor 10.1.2.2 update-source Loopback0
    neighbor 10.1.3.3 update-source Loopback0
  • C. router bgp 100
    neighbor 10.1.1.1 route-reflector-client
    neighbor 10.1.2.2 route-reflector-client
    neighbor 10.1.3.3 route-reflector-client
  • D. router bgp 100
    neighbor 10.1.1.1 ebgp-multihop
    neighbor 10.1.2.2 ebgp-multihop
    neighbor 10.1.3.3 ebgp-muttihop
Show Suggested Answer Hide Answer
Suggested Answer: C 🗳️
by Slinky at May 14, 2023, 6:45 p.m.

Comments

Chosen Answer:
This is a voting comment (?). It is better to Upvote an existing comment if you don't have anything to add.
Switch to a voting comment New
Submit Cancel
[Removed]
9 months, 2 weeks ago
Selected Answer: C
C is correct
upvoted 1 times
...
[Removed]
9 months, 3 weeks ago
Selected Answer: C
C is correct
upvoted 1 times
...
bk989
9 months, 3 weeks ago
R1: RR#show ip bgp neighbors 10.1.1.1 advertised-routes Total number of prefixes 0 router bgp 100 bgp log-neighbor-changes neighbor 10.1.1.1 remote-as 100 neighbor 10.1.2.2 remote-as 100 neighbor 10.1.3.3 remote-as 100
upvoted 1 times
bk989
9 months, 3 weeks ago
RR#show ip bgp neighbors 10.1.1.1 advertised-routes BGP table version is 7, local router ID is 10.1.3.4 Status codes: s suppressed, d damped, h history, * valid, > best, i - internal, r RIB-failure, S Stale, m multipath, b backup-path, f RT-Filter, x best-external, a additional-path, c RIB-compressed, Origin codes: i - IGP, e - EGP, ? - incomplete RPKI validation codes: V valid, I invalid, N Not found Network Next Hop Metric LocPrf Weight Path *>i 1.1.1.0/24 10.1.1.1 0 100 0 i *>i 3.3.3.0/24 10.1.3.3 0 100 0 i Total number of prefixes 2
upvoted 1 times
bk989
9 months, 3 weeks ago
router bgp 100 bgp log-neighbor-changes network 10.1.1.0 mask 255.255.255.0 network 10.1.2.0 mask 255.255.255.0 network 10.1.3.0 mask 255.255.255.0 neighbor 10.1.1.1 remote-as 100 neighbor 10.1.1.1 route-reflector-client neighbor 10.1.2.2 remote-as 100 neighbor 10.1.2.2 route-reflector-client neighbor 10.1.3.3 remote-as 100 neighbor 10.1.3.3 route-reflector-client ASBR1#show ip bgp 3.3.3.0 BGP routing table entry for 3.3.3.0/24, version 6 Paths: (1 available, best #1, table default) Not advertised to any peer Refresh Epoch 6 Local 10.1.3.3 from 10.1.1.4 (10.1.3.4) Origin IGP, metric 0, localpref 100, valid, internal, best Originator: 10.1.3.3, Cluster list: 10.1.3.4 rx pathid: 0, tx pathid: 0x0
upvoted 1 times
bk989
9 months, 3 weeks ago
ASBR1 ping ASBR3 loopback ASBR1#ping 3.3.3.3 Type escape sequence to abort. Sending 5, 100-byte ICMP Echos to 3.3.3.3, timeout is 2 seconds: !!!!! Success rate is 100 percent (5/5), round-trip min/avg/max = 5/7/16 ms ASBR1#
upvoted 1 times
bk989
9 months, 3 weeks ago
Answer = C
upvoted 1 times
bk989
8 months, 3 weeks ago
Remember route-reflector doesn't overwrite next-hop next-hop-self would be ncie to have but not needed if we are advertising the connected links on the RR Finally these links may be getting advertised by the exchange point on switch 1
upvoted 2 times
...
...
...
...
...
...
[Removed]
1 year, 5 months ago
Selected Answer: C
Its a full mesh so the best routing paths will be ensured by using Route Reflectors.
upvoted 2 times
...
inteldarvid
1 year, 10 months ago
Selected Answer: C
option C correct
upvoted 1 times
...
HungarianDish_111
1 year, 12 months ago
Selected Answer: C
I think that "C" is sufficient for the solution.
upvoted 4 times
HungarianDish_111
1 year, 12 months ago
About route reflectors and next-hop-self: https://community.cisco.com/t5/routing/bgp-next-hop-self-not-working-while-doing-rr/td-p/2737272
upvoted 3 times
bk989
8 months, 2 weeks ago
nice doc
upvoted 1 times
...
HungarianDish_111
1 year, 11 months ago
Confirmed solution "C" in CML lab (added and propagated a loopback on ASBR1 for testing, plus added missing network statements).
upvoted 1 times
...
...
...
Slinky
2 years ago
You need both rr-client and next-hop-self commands to propagate routes.
upvoted 1 times
bk989
9 months, 3 weeks ago
You may be right however since RR doesn't overwrite next hop
upvoted 2 times
...
bk989
1 year, 1 month ago
rr for propagation of ibgp because not propagated by default. Only need next-hop-self if the ip address is not reachable by the client. If it is reachable by the client no need for it. We can use both however.
upvoted 1 times
...
...
Community vote distribution
A (35%)
C (25%)
B (20%)
Other
Most Voted
A voting comment increases the vote count for the chosen answer by one.

Upvoting a comment with a selected answer will also increase the vote count towards that answer by one. So if you see a comment that you already agree with, you can upvote it instead of posting a new comment.

SaveCancel
exam
Someone Bought Contributor Access for:
SY0-701
London, 1 minute ago