Cisco Exam 300-510 Topic 9 Question 68 Discussion

Actual exam question for Cisco's 300-510 exam

Question #: 68
Topic #: 9

Refer to the exhibit.

Router 1 and Router2 have shared routes in the OSPF database but the routes are missing from their routing tables. Checking me prefix-list configuration on both routers, the engineer confirmed all networks are allowed What action should the engineer take to fa the problem?

AConfigure the two routers with different process IDs

BConfigure the two routers with different hello and dead timer values

CSwitch the DR and BDR roles between the two routers

DConfigure interface Senal1/0 on Router1 as a point-to-point interface

Show Suggested Answer

Suggested Answer: D, E

by Glendora at Apr 21, 2023, 12:20 AM

Limited Time Offer

25%

Off

Get Premium 300-510 Questions as Interactive Web-Based Practice Test or PDF

Contribute your Thoughts:

Submit Cancel

Almeta

2 months ago

Haha, I bet the engineer is just sitting there scratching their head, wondering 'How did I miss this obvious point-to-point configuration?' Classic CCNA exam question!

upvoted 0 times

Doretha

27 days ago

C) Switch the DR and BDR roles between the two routers

upvoted 0 times

...

Crissy

1 months ago

B) Configure the two routers with different hello and dead timer values

upvoted 0 times

...

Wenona

1 months ago

A) Configure the two routers with different process IDs

upvoted 0 times

...

Pearlene

2 months ago

Wait, what if the engineer tried to change the prefix-list configuration? I mean, if the networks are allowed, maybe there's something else going on with the prefix-list that's causing the issue.

upvoted 0 times

Erin

11 days ago

User 3: It's worth a shot to see if there's an issue with the prefix-list.

upvoted 0 times

...

Annita

15 days ago

User 2: That's a good point. The engineer should double check the prefix-list.

upvoted 0 times

...

Rashida

1 months ago

User 1: Maybe the prefix-list configuration is causing the issue.

upvoted 0 times

...

Jovita

2 months ago

Ah, I see! Configuring the interface as point-to-point could be the solution. That might help ensure the routes are properly advertised and included in the routing tables. Makes sense to me.

upvoted 0 times

Janet

6 days ago

User 4: It's worth a shot. Let's see if that resolves the problem.

upvoted 0 times

...

Jina

8 days ago

User 3: Maybe the engineer should try that solution to see if it works.

upvoted 0 times

...

Jessenia

9 days ago

User 2: Yeah, that sounds like a good idea. It might fix the issue with the missing routes.

upvoted 0 times

...

Izetta

16 days ago

Configuring the two routers with different hello and dead timer values could be another solution.

upvoted 0 times

...

Ivette

1 months ago

User 1: I think configuring the interface as point-to-point could help.

upvoted 0 times

...

Terrilyn

1 months ago

Switching the DR and BDR roles between the two routers might also resolve the issue.

upvoted 0 times

...

Emilio

1 months ago

Configuring the interface as point-to-point could help ensure the routes are properly advertised.

upvoted 0 times

...

Winfred

1 months ago

Router1 and Router2 should be configured with different process IDs.

upvoted 0 times

...

Filiberto

2 months ago

Switching the DR and BDR roles? That's an interesting idea, but I don't think that's the right approach here. The problem seems to be with the routing table entries, not the OSPF election process.

upvoted 0 times

...

Franklyn

2 months ago

But what about switching the DR and BDR roles? That could also be a solution.

upvoted 0 times

...

Keith

2 months ago

Hmm, I'm not sure that changing the process IDs or the hello/dead timers would fix this issue. It seems like the routes are missing from the routing tables, so the configuration might be the problem.

upvoted 0 times