300-510 SPRI: Implementing Cisco Service Provider Advanced Routing SolutionsDemo

By Cisco · Question Mode

QuestionQ164

Routing Policy and Manipulation

Refer to the exhibit.

Question Image

CE1 and CE2 are iBGP peers in AS 65516. All traffic leaving AS 65516 must traverse the CE1-to-PE1 link. CE1 advertises a higher local preference to CE2, but CE2 traffic still prefers the PE2 link. Which action resolves the issue?

  • A Add the lower local-preference value on PE2 towards CE2.
  • B Configure CE1 to send routes to CE2 with a higher MED.
  • C Configure CE1 to send routes to CE2 with a higher weight.
  • D Add the next-hop self command to the CE1 neighbor statement for CE2.
Explanation

iBGP does not change the next-hop attribute by default. Routes CE1 learned through PE1 are therefore advertised to CE2 with PE1 retained as their next hop. Configuring next-hop self for CE2 makes CE1 the next hop, allowing CE2 to use the route with the higher local preference and send exit traffic through CE1 to PE1.

Community Discussion

No comments yet. Be the first to start the discussion!