You are implementing traffic engineering in your MPLS network. You must ensure that the MPLS routes are used to traverse your network. Your solution should not affect IGP routes in your route tables.
In this scenario, which traffic engineering setting will accomplish this behavior?
bgp---On BGP destinations only. Ingress routes are installed in the inet.3 routing table.
bgp-igp---On both BGP and IGP destinations. Ingress routes are installed in the inet.0 routing table. If IGP shortcuts are enabled, the shortcut routes are automatically installed in the inet.0 routing table.
bgp-igp-both-ribs---On both BGP and IGP destinations. Ingress routes are installed in the inet.0 and inet.3 routing tables. This option is used to support VPNs.
mpls-forwarding---On both BGP and IGP destinations. Use ingress routes for forwarding only, not for routing.
You want to share routes between two routing instances that you have configured?
What are two ways to accomplish this task? (Choose two.)
static route with a next-hop of next-table pointing to the appropriate routing table which contains more accurate information rib-groups to mirror routing information from one route-table to another. However, in many cases, in order to make this work, interface-routes also need to be mirrored. RIB Group policy can be used to constrain the routing information instance-import and instance-export statements configured within the individual routing-instances to leak routes from one table to another. Again, policy can be used here to constrain the routing information. This method is more straightforward than the rib-group method A final approach is to use physical interfaces or logical-tunnels to stitch routing-instances and use a routing protocol or static routes across this connection between the two routing-instances.
You are troubleshooting two OSPF routers that have an adjacency that remains in the ExStart state.
What would cause this problem?
https://www.cisco.com/c/en/us/support/docs/ip/open-shortest-path-first-ospf/13684-12.html#anc13
Neighbors Stuck in Exstart/Exchange State The problem occurs most frequently when you attempt to run OSPF between a Cisco router and another vendor router. The problem occurs when the maximum transmission unit (MTU) settings for neighboring router interfaces do not match. If the router with the higher MTU sends a packet larger that the MTU set on the neighboring router, the neighbor router ignores the packet. When this problem occurs, the output of the show ip ospf neighbor command displays output similar to what is shown in this figure.
You are bringing a new network online with three IS-IS routers using default Junos election priorities. The routers are configured as Level 2 only IS-IS routers. Which statement is true about the DIS election in this scenario?
A router's priority for becoming the designated router is indicated by an arbitrary number from 0 through 127, which you configure on the IS-IS interface. The router with the highest priority becomes the designated router for the area (Level 1, Level 2, or both), also configured on the IS-IS interface. If routers in the network have the same priority, then the router with the highest MAC address is elected as the designated router. By default, routers have a priority value of 64.
Currently there are no comments in this discussion, be the first to comment!