R1 and R8 are not receiving each other's routes. Referring to the exhibit, what are three configuration commands that would solve this problem? (Choose three.)
A.
Configure remove-private on advertisements from AS 64497 toward AS 64498.
B.
Configure as-override on advertisement from AS 64500 toward AS 64512.
C.
Configure remove-private on advertisements from AS 64500 toward AS 64499.
D.
Configure loops and advertise-peer-as on routers in AS 64497 and AS 64450.
E.
Configure loops on routers in AS 65412 and advertise-peer-as on routers in AS 64498.
Maybe(I said maybe) should be:
C - A -B
Am I right, fellas? Look:
E -> wrong -> is not correct advertise peer as should configured on 64497 or 64500
D -> wrong -> is not correct also loop option should be configured in 65412
A and C -> CORRECT -> because remove private AS from AS PATH /D AS 64500 override PRIVATE AS
ABC
A. Configure remove-private on advertisements from AS 64497 toward AS 64498.
This would ensure that private AS numbers are removed from the AS path when sending updates between these ASes, helping to resolve any routing issues caused by private AS numbers.
B. Configure as-override on advertisement from AS 64500 toward AS 64512.
This command allows routers to override their own AS number when advertising routes to peers within the same AS. It helps avoid issues where routes are dropped because they appear to loop back to the origin AS.
C. Configure remove-private on advertisements from AS 64500 toward AS 64499.
Similar to option A, this configuration will remove private AS numbers in the path when advertising routes, helping R1 and R8 to receive each other’s routes by preventing any issues related to private AS numbers in the AS path.
These configurations resolve problems typically caused by private AS numbers or AS path loop prevention mechanisms that interfere with proper route exchange between routers in different ASes.
I don't know from where this question was taken, but it seems to be wrongly asked.
If we look to RIB out on R6 and R2, the routes from R8 to R1 (and vice versa) are already being advertised and contain private AS, so nothing blocks private AS advertisement in the path. Only applying loops on AS 65412 is missing. (E. contains this part )
If we take into account that ISPs block routes that are advertised from private ASs (and not how illustrated on the question output), then A. and C. are correct.
If this question really exists and is not just a typo mistake, I would answer A,C, and E.
If we use B and C, in this case, there is no need for loops on AS 65412 (it is so weird to answer like this, although theoretically it will work)
A. because strip of private-as is necessary from AS64497 to AS64498 (left side)
C. because strip of private-as is necessary from AS64500 to AS64499 (right side)
D. because loop and advertise-peer-as must be configured both side (provider PE)
124 / 5.000
Resultados de traducción
Resultado de traducción
The loop command must be configured on the routers in AS 65412 so that they allow routes that have the same AS in their AS PATH
upvoted 1 times
...
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.
StargateCommand
Highly Voted 10 months agoAvee123
Most Recent 2 months, 3 weeks agoJenia1
4 months agoGuru29
6 months, 2 weeks ago3574e4e
7 months, 2 weeks agoantigel8
7 months, 2 weeks agoDimsop_Technology
8 months, 1 week ago