R2 has a locally originated prefix 192.168.130.0/24 and has these configurations: What is the result when the route-map OUT command is applied toward an eBGP neighbor R1 (1.1.1.1) by using the neighbor 1.1.1.1 route-map OUT out command?
A.
R1 sees 192.168.130.0/24 as two AS hops away instead of one AS hop away.
B.
R1 does not accept any routes other than 192.168.130.0/24
C.
R1 does not forward traffic that is destined for 192.168.30.0/24
D.
Network 192.168.130.0/24 is not allowed in the R1 table
I'm going with A. The as-prepend will add the additional AS identifier which in turn makes the route 2 AS hops a way. This is used with multihomed ISP configurations to determine the path of incoming traffic.
Here is the answer:
A. R1 sees 192.168.130.0/24 as two AS hops away instead of one AS hop away. --> From the perspective of R2 this is true. Key word is 'locally originated'. This is definately truen
B. R1 does not accept any routes other than 192.168.130.0/24 This is interesting but R1 can accept prefixes from R3.
C. R1 does not forward traffic that is destined for 192.168.30.0/24 --> This makes no sense. This is the only prefix advertised from bgp R2 (local router) to R1
D. Network 192.168.130.0/24 is not allowed in the R1 table This is the only prefix.
Our choice is A or B. I choose A, because R1 DOES accept other prefixes, from other protocols or other routers.
A is the correct answer. AS-path prepending is a trick where you add extra steps to a route's path in BGP. This makes the route seem less appealing to other routers by making it look longer than it really is.
I would say B. Who said that the ebgp peers are directly connected? it can be an ebgp-multihop 3 or something in the config. The only answer what is right in any circumstances is B....
A. R1 sees 192.168.130.0/24 as two AS hops away instead of one AS hop away.
and R2 does filter all other route adverticements other than 192.168.130.0/24 when sending to R1, fue to ipmlicit deny (missing route-map permit 20 statement
What if the Routemap does not have a permit statement sequence 20? Then B should also be an answer as the explicit deny statement will deny any network other than 192.168.130.x
The wording is tricky here, R1 will accept routes other than 192.168.130.x because R1 does not have any RM in place, R2 however will not sent any routes other than 192.168.130.x
//ORIGINAL WITHOUT AS-PREPEND//
R3#sh ip bgp | i 192.
*> 192.168.130.0 2.2.2.2 0 65002 65000 i
//ORIGINAL WITH AS-PREPEND//
R3#sh ip bgp | i 192.
*> 192.168.130.0 2.2.2.2 0 65002 65000 65000 i
This section is not available anymore. Please use the main Exam Page.300-410 Exam Questions
Log in to ExamTopics
Sign in:
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.
Guitarman
Highly Voted 4 years, 8 months agoHungarianDish_111
Highly Voted 2 years agobk989
Most Recent 7 months, 2 weeks agohanyu16300000
7 months, 3 weeks ago[Removed]
9 months, 3 weeks agobk989
1 year, 1 month agoMasoudGhorbani
1 year, 2 months agorogabor81
2 years, 3 months agoAlmylle
1 year, 11 months agonicoaburto
2 years, 3 months agoMD_Shox
2 years, 5 months agokaisehhop
2 years, 5 months agobryaberson
2 years, 7 months agopotato_inet0
1 year, 11 months agoalexnadal99
1 year, 2 months agoAlexloh
2 years, 9 months agoAlexloh
2 years, 11 months agoxziomal9
3 years agoHack4
3 years, 3 months agoNetworkingguy
3 years, 3 months ago