Labbed it right now. To have this rouing table R1 and R3 have auto-summary enabled.
If you disable the auto-summary on R2 nothing change. and from R2 you cannot ping the 172 interface of R3. If you enable a floating /24 route (with or without 254, it doesn't matter) you can successfully ping the 172 interface on R3
I agree I did same lab, same results. Example:
ip route 172.16.2.0 255.255.255.0 10.1.2.3 254
solves our problem of router not knowing where to send routes to R3.
Since auto-sumamry enabled on R1, it autosummarizes its locally generated eigrp routes.
Actually I have labbed it, If you disable auto summarization in R2 nothing seems to change, you will advertise the routes from the other routers has they are.
It auto summarization was active in all the network I should receive a 172.16.0.0/16 network.
In this case I think that the router is not receving the specific routes via EIGRP, so we need to configure a static route for fix the problem as soon as possible
Its better to be specific on situations like this in order to not have packets destined for one address, (172.16.1.0) and have it go instead to another address. (172.16.2.0)
Therefore, disabling summarization would be needed for packets to go to their intended destination.
Never mind, I read the question too fast. I CHOOSE "A" due to R2 being advertised summary routes. Adding the floating static route would fix the issue to then have packets go to their intended destination.
With auto-summary enabled, subnets will be advertised as classful networks. This causes problems with discontiguous networks. R2 will think it has two equal paths (via R1 and R3) to reach 172.16.0.0/16.
https://networklessons.com/eigrp/eigrp-auto-summary
i believe its a /16 thats currently in the routing table, even with a 172.16.0.0 /24 route, the router is still not aware of the existence of the interesting route, so creating the route is still valid
This is supposed to be A, the /24 prefix is being sent to R2 by its neighbours, the only way it will route properly to the desired /24 prefix is to create a route with a longer prefix. This takes precedence over the current summarized route in the routing table
I checked https://networklessons.com/cisco/ccie-routing-switching/eigrp-auto-summary and for sure the answer is A (!) here. Disable auto summary only works on the routers that actually advertise the routes initialy.
upvoted 2 times
...
...
...
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.
halil395
Highly Voted 1 year, 3 months agoDv123456
Highly Voted 9 months, 3 weeks agobk989
8 months, 2 weeks ago[Removed]
Most Recent 9 months, 3 weeks agoXBfoundX
10 months, 2 weeks agoXBfoundX
10 months, 2 weeks agoCoffee_bean_master
11 months, 3 weeks agoCoffee_bean_master
11 months, 3 weeks agoHungarianDish_111
2 years agoheeeeyajoke
2 years, 4 months agoheeeeyajoke
2 years, 4 months agoPietjeplukgeluk
1 year, 4 months agoPietjeplukgeluk
1 year, 4 months ago