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 426 discussion

Actual exam question from Cisco's 300-410
Question #: 426
Topic #: 1
[All 300-410 Questions]



Refer to the exhibit. An engineer must filter incoming EIGRP updates to allow only a set of specific prefixes. The distribute list is tested, and it filters out all routes except network 10.10.10.0/24. How should the engineer temporarily allow all prefixes to be learned by the router again without adjusting the existing access list?

  • A. A permit any statement should be added before completing the ACL with the required prefixes, and then the permit any statement can be removed.
  • B. A permit 20 statement should be added before completing the ACL with the required prefixes, and then the permit 20 statement can be removed.
  • C. A continue statement should be added within the permit 10 statement before completing the ACL with the required prefixes, and then the continue statement can be removed.
  • D. An extended access list must be used instead of a standard access list to accomplish the task.
Show Suggested Answer Hide Answer
Suggested Answer: B 🗳️
by GReddy2323 at Feb. 7, 2023, 5:46 a.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]
Highly Voted 1 year, 3 months ago
Selected Answer: B
Its B but the language in the question is misleading.
upvoted 6 times
Pietjeplukgeluk
1 year, 2 months ago
The question is indeed of low quality, and i agree, it should be B. But the answer could be more clear as "route-map" is not actually mentioned in the answer. B should be: "A permit 20 statement should be added to the route-map before completing the ACL with the required prefixes, and then the permit 20 statement can be removed from the route-map when done."
upvoted 2 times
bk989
8 months ago
I just reread this part: without adjusting the existing access list? I am wrong you are correct What a stupid question B doesn't even make sense then
upvoted 1 times
...
bk989
8 months ago
note we cant do a "required any" statement with permitted prefixes: permit any required_prefixes (wrong order) permit required_prefixes any (right order) Since it is asking for a permit any, which looks like permit any before the required_prefixes, this won't work. Either way B is more precise. Answer = B.
upvoted 1 times
...
...
...
BALAKE
Most Recent 1 month ago
Selected Answer: B
This is the dumbest shit...
upvoted 1 times
...
CiscoTerminator
2 months, 4 weeks ago
Selected Answer: B
I thot question said without adjusting the existing ACL, isn't adding an ACE adjusting the ACL?
upvoted 1 times
Sammy3637
2 months, 1 week ago
ya,kinda stupid , but what they mean is , add permit 20 to the 'route-map'
upvoted 1 times
...
...
Sammy3637
3 months, 1 week ago
Selected Answer: B
it's so stupid , dont change the acl but change the acl ....
upvoted 1 times
...
[Removed]
9 months, 1 week ago
Selected Answer: B
B is correct it must be done on the route map, not on the ACL
upvoted 3 times
bk989
8 months, 1 week ago
no. It is done on the ACL. We temporarily add the required prefixes in ACL sequence 20. Then remove them after testing is complete. If we do a permit 20 route map it permits ALL prefixes, not just the required prefixes.
upvoted 1 times
CiscoTerminator
2 months, 4 weeks ago
question said dont adjust the ACL mate..route-map entries can also be removed you know.
upvoted 1 times
...
...
...
[Removed]
9 months, 1 week ago
Selected Answer: B
B is correct it must be done on the route map, not on the ACL
upvoted 1 times
...
[Removed]
1 year, 9 months ago
Selected Answer: B
Requirement: temporarily allow all routes without modifying the ACCESS-LIST D. is wrong, this specifies directly modifying access list A. is wrong, there is no such command as "permit any" on a route-map C. is wrong, the continue statement under route-map, as I understand it, means that it should continue to process the route-map entry for the next statement in it. B. is correct, we need to override the implicit deny at the end of a route-map list with a statement that permits all routes. This will allow the engineer to modify the ACL without causing a longer outage.
upvoted 4 times
Brand
1 year, 8 months ago
My friend, both A and B is talking about adding permit any to ACL.
upvoted 2 times
...
...
Gedson
1 year, 9 months ago
Selected Answer: A
When we first read the requirement "... without adjusting the existing access list", we think the best solution is to add the statement "route-map EIGRP permit 20" (without any "match" statement) at the end of the route-map but there is no such choice.
upvoted 4 times
...
HungarianDish_111
1 year, 11 months ago
Selected Answer: B
Tested the scenario in CML.
upvoted 2 times
...
HungarianDish_111
1 year, 11 months ago
It is about adding and removing this part of the route-map: route-map EIGRP permit 20
upvoted 3 times
HungarianDish_111
1 year, 11 months ago
"permit statement that when used without any match statements, means “match all” effectively permitting all other routes" http://notthenetwork.me/blog/2013/07/24/ccnp-route-study-eigrp-route-filtering/
upvoted 2 times
...
...
GReddy2323
2 years, 2 months ago
Can someone please explain? It says without adjusting the existing access list... how can it be B?
upvoted 1 times
Typovy
2 years, 1 month ago
This mean permit statement in routemap
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