Exam 300-410 topic 1 question 276 discussion

no need to config recursive ---- The recursive next-hop IP address is installed in the routing table and can be a subnet that is not directly connected. If the recursive next-hop IP address is not available, packets are routed using a default route. --- https://www.cisco.com/en/US/docs/ios/iproute_pi/configuration/guide/iri_prb_rec_next_hop_external_docbase_0900e4b1810fe58b_4container_external_docbase_0900e4b181525fed.html

I believe the 10.4.4.4 is not directly connected to this router, but is connected to a router behind 10.1.1.0/24 subnet. So recursive would be necessary. In that case I would go for answer D.

This is not a networking question, this is a english language question…

If the next-hop address's subnet directly connected there is no need to recursive configuration

Correct answer is B

I will go with answer B because to you need permit 20 because of the deny implicit

The IP address 10.4.4.4 is directly connected to the router connected to the 10.1.1.0/24 subnet. The router you are configuring is on the 10.10.1.0/24 subnet, so it is a different device. Therefore, recursive is necessary. Also, since this is PBR, permit 20 is not required.

" which is directly connected to the router that is connected to the 10.1.1.0/24 subnet." I feel (directly connected to the router) part meant to through us off, but the question is giving us clue on the part "override our normal routing behavior" for me normal behavior means next-hop connected to us already.

B is correct Recursive next-hop not needed here as the 10.1.1.0/24 is DIRECTLY CONNECTED to our PREFERED next-hop (10.4.4.4). Recursive needed if the PREFERD next-hop not connected to router with the route-map APPLIED on.

is B, we are in the router that have the lan interface 10.10.1.0/24 subnet configured. The rotuer may be have multiple next hops and we have also the p2p interface 10.4.4.x subnet and 10.4.4.4 is my next hop, recursive is not needed...

Im going with B on this since the question states that its directly connected to the router that is connected to 10.1.1.0 24 network. D can be used, off course, but B is sufficient.

D is the correct answer because the next-hop is not directly connected then "recursive" is necessary and "Policy 20" is not needed.

Why are so many people voting D when then question clearly states "via a next hop of 10.4.4.4, which is DIRECTLY CONNECTED to the router" ?

D is correct. route-map POLICY permit 20 is not used in PBR. If you do not match packets on a route-map during PBR, PBR does not take any action on that packet, and is routed normally per the routing table/FIB/etc.

There are 4 Devices 1. LAN PC 10.10.1.X/24 -- > Router directly connected to 10.10.1.X -->Router with IP 10.4.4.4 --> destination 10.10.10.10. Just understand there are 4 nodes. 1.Client 10.10.1.X/24 2. Router connected to 10.10.1.X 3 Router we choose as next hop (10.4.4.4) 4. Destination 10.10.10.10 You are configuring node 2 and choosing node 3 as next hop. No recursive needed. Permit 20 does not harm in route map.

team for me correct is "C", because the next hop (recursive) is remote and not connect directly and its necessary continue route map with seq "20", because block or deny rest traffic

For me D is the correct answer, because in this case u need the recursive command, the 10.4.4.4 is NOT directly connected to the router.