{"id":14786,"date":"2026-09-17T07:18:39","date_gmt":"2026-09-17T07:18:39","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.examlabs.com\/certification\/?p=14786"},"modified":"2026-09-17T07:18:39","modified_gmt":"2026-09-17T07:18:39","slug":"cisco-ccnp-300-415-practice-test-questions-and-exam-dumps-part18-q341-360","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.examlabs.com\/certification\/cisco-ccnp-300-415-practice-test-questions-and-exam-dumps-part18-q341-360\/","title":{"rendered":"Cisco CCNP 300-415 Practice Test Questions and Exam Dumps Part18 Q341-360"},"content":{"rendered":"<h1><\/h1>\n<h2><b>View Full <\/b><a href=\"https:\/\/www.examlabs.com\/300-415-exam-dumps\"><b>Cisco CCNP 300-415 Exam Dumps<\/b><\/a><b> and Practice Test Dumps.<\/b><\/h2>\n<p>&nbsp;<\/p>\n<h3><b>Question 341<\/b><\/h3>\n<p><b>Which EIGRP component determines whether an alternate path can be considered loop-free?<\/b><\/p>\n<ol>\n<li style=\"font-weight: 400;\" aria-level=\"1\"><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Variance<\/span><\/li>\n<li style=\"font-weight: 400;\" aria-level=\"1\"><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Feasibility condition<\/span><\/li>\n<li style=\"font-weight: 400;\" aria-level=\"1\"><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Split horizon<\/span><\/li>\n<li style=\"font-weight: 400;\" aria-level=\"1\"><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Route summarization<\/span><\/li>\n<\/ol>\n<p><b>Correct Answer: 2<\/b><\/p>\n<h3><b>Explanation<\/b><\/h3>\n<p><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">The EIGRP feasibility condition determines whether an alternate path can be considered loop-free and therefore qualify as a feasible successor. For a neighboring route to satisfy this condition, its Reported Distance must be less than the local router&#8217;s Feasible Distance for that destination. DUAL uses this relationship to safely identify alternate paths without requiring additional queries. Variance can permit unequal-cost load balancing, but it does not by itself make an invalid path loop-free. Split horizon controls route advertisement behavior, while route summarization reduces the number of prefixes exchanged. The feasibility condition is therefore a fundamental part of EIGRP&#8217;s loop-free convergence mechanism.<\/span><\/p>\n<h3><b>Question 342<\/b><\/h3>\n<p><b>Which BGP attribute is propagated through iBGP and normally has a higher-is-better preference?<\/b><\/p>\n<ol>\n<li style=\"font-weight: 400;\" aria-level=\"1\"><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">MED<\/span><\/li>\n<li style=\"font-weight: 400;\" aria-level=\"1\"><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Origin<\/span><\/li>\n<li style=\"font-weight: 400;\" aria-level=\"1\"><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Local Preference<\/span><\/li>\n<li style=\"font-weight: 400;\" aria-level=\"1\"><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">AS Path<\/span><\/li>\n<\/ol>\n<p><b>Correct Answer: 3<\/b><\/p>\n<h3><b>Explanation<\/b><\/h3>\n<p><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Local Preference is propagated through iBGP and is normally preferred when its value is higher. It is primarily used to influence outbound traffic from an autonomous system. An organization with multiple external connections can assign different Local Preference values to routes learned from those connections. Internal BGP routers then use the values to help select a preferred exit point. Weight also uses a higher-is-better comparison on Cisco routers, but it is local to the individual router and is evaluated before Local Preference. MED is generally lower-is-better, while AS Path is generally preferred when shorter. Local Preference is therefore an important AS-wide BGP policy attribute.<\/span><\/p>\n<h3><b>Question 343<\/b><\/h3>\n<p><b>Which OSPF packet is used to exchange summaries of the link-state database during adjacency formation?<\/b><\/p>\n<ol>\n<li style=\"font-weight: 400;\" aria-level=\"1\"><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Hello<\/span><\/li>\n<li style=\"font-weight: 400;\" aria-level=\"1\"><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Database Description<\/span><\/li>\n<li style=\"font-weight: 400;\" aria-level=\"1\"><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Link-State Request<\/span><\/li>\n<li style=\"font-weight: 400;\" aria-level=\"1\"><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Link-State Update<\/span><\/li>\n<\/ol>\n<p><b>Correct Answer: 2<\/b><\/p>\n<h3><b>Explanation<\/b><\/h3>\n<p><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Database Description packets are used during OSPF adjacency formation to exchange summaries of the routers&#8217; link-state databases. They do not normally carry the complete LSAs; instead, they describe the available LSA information so each router can determine which LSAs it needs. Missing or outdated LSAs are then requested using Link-State Request packets. Link-State Update packets carry the requested LSAs, while Hello packets establish and maintain neighbor relationships. Database Description packets are especially important during the Exchange state. Problems during this stage can result from issues such as MTU mismatches, network-type differences, or other OSPF parameter inconsistencies.<\/span><\/p>\n<h3><b>Question 344<\/b><\/h3>\n<p><b>Which EIGRP packet provides routing information when a neighbor responds to a Query?<\/b><\/p>\n<ol>\n<li style=\"font-weight: 400;\" aria-level=\"1\"><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Reply<\/span><\/li>\n<li style=\"font-weight: 400;\" aria-level=\"1\"><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Update<\/span><\/li>\n<li style=\"font-weight: 400;\" aria-level=\"1\"><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Hello<\/span><\/li>\n<li style=\"font-weight: 400;\" aria-level=\"1\"><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Acknowledgment<\/span><\/li>\n<\/ol>\n<p><b>Correct Answer: 1<\/b><\/p>\n<h3><b>Explanation<\/b><\/h3>\n<p><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">EIGRP Reply packets are sent by a neighbor in response to an EIGRP Query. When a router loses its successor and has no feasible successor, it may query neighboring routers to discover whether another valid path exists. Each queried neighbor responds with a Reply indicating whether it has a usable route. This Query and Reply process is part of EIGRP&#8217;s DUAL-based convergence mechanism. Update packets advertise routing information independently, Hello packets maintain neighbor relationships, and acknowledgments confirm reliable delivery. Excessive Query propagation can increase convergence time, which is why techniques such as EIGRP stub routing and route summarization are valuable in larger network designs.<\/span><\/p>\n<h3><b>Question 345<\/b><\/h3>\n<p><b>Which BGP attribute is primarily used to influence outbound traffic within an autonomous system?<\/b><\/p>\n<ol>\n<li style=\"font-weight: 400;\" aria-level=\"1\"><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">MED<\/span><\/li>\n<li style=\"font-weight: 400;\" aria-level=\"1\"><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Local Preference<\/span><\/li>\n<li style=\"font-weight: 400;\" aria-level=\"1\"><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Origin<\/span><\/li>\n<li style=\"font-weight: 400;\" aria-level=\"1\"><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Next Hop<\/span><\/li>\n<\/ol>\n<p><b>Correct Answer: 2<\/b><\/p>\n<h3><b>Explanation<\/b><\/h3>\n<p><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Local Preference is primarily used to influence outbound traffic within an autonomous system. A higher Local Preference is normally preferred, allowing administrators to determine which external connection should be used as the preferred exit point. The attribute is propagated through iBGP so multiple routers can apply the same policy. MED is generally used to influence how another autonomous system selects an entry point, while Origin describes how a route entered BGP. Next Hop identifies the IP address used to reach a BGP destination. Local Preference is therefore an important tool for controlling outbound traffic across networks with multiple external connections.<\/span><\/p>\n<h3><b>Question 346<\/b><\/h3>\n<p><b>Which OSPF state follows ExStart during normal adjacency formation?<\/b><\/p>\n<ol>\n<li style=\"font-weight: 400;\" aria-level=\"1\"><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Loading<\/span><\/li>\n<li style=\"font-weight: 400;\" aria-level=\"1\"><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Full<\/span><\/li>\n<li style=\"font-weight: 400;\" aria-level=\"1\"><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Exchange<\/span><\/li>\n<li style=\"font-weight: 400;\" aria-level=\"1\"><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Init<\/span><\/li>\n<\/ol>\n<p><b>Correct Answer: 3<\/b><\/p>\n<h3><b>Explanation<\/b><\/h3>\n<p><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">The Exchange state follows ExStart during normal OSPF adjacency formation. During ExStart, neighboring routers establish which router will act as the master for Database Description packet exchange. In the Exchange state, the routers exchange Database Description packets containing summaries of their link-state databases. After determining which LSAs are missing or outdated, they use Link-State Request packets to request additional information. The relationship then moves into Loading and eventually Full after database synchronization is complete. Init occurs much earlier during neighbor discovery. Understanding the OSPF state sequence is useful when diagnosing adjacencies that become stuck during database synchronization.<\/span><\/p>\n<h3><b>Question 347<\/b><\/h3>\n<p><b>Which EIGRP metric component uses the minimum bandwidth available along a route?<\/b><\/p>\n<ol>\n<li style=\"font-weight: 400;\" aria-level=\"1\"><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Reliability<\/span><\/li>\n<li style=\"font-weight: 400;\" aria-level=\"1\"><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Bandwidth<\/span><\/li>\n<li style=\"font-weight: 400;\" aria-level=\"1\"><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Delay<\/span><\/li>\n<li style=\"font-weight: 400;\" aria-level=\"1\"><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Load<\/span><\/li>\n<\/ol>\n<p><b>Correct Answer: 2<\/b><\/p>\n<h3><b>Explanation<\/b><\/h3>\n<p><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">The bandwidth component of the EIGRP metric uses the minimum bandwidth among the interfaces in the path. EIGRP does not add all bandwidth values together. Instead, the slowest link determines the bandwidth value used by the default composite metric calculation. Delay is different because EIGRP accumulates delay across the complete path. Reliability and load can be included when non-default K-values are configured, but the default EIGRP configuration primarily uses bandwidth and delay. This distinction is important when comparing paths because a single low-bandwidth interface can significantly affect the resulting EIGRP metric and cause another route to become preferred.<\/span><\/p>\n<h3><b>Question 348<\/b><\/h3>\n<p><b>Which BGP command displays the BGP routing table and path-selection information?<\/b><\/p>\n<ol>\n<li style=\"font-weight: 400;\" aria-level=\"1\"><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">show ip bgp<\/span><\/li>\n<li style=\"font-weight: 400;\" aria-level=\"1\"><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">show ip bgp summary<\/span><\/li>\n<li style=\"font-weight: 400;\" aria-level=\"1\"><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">show ip bgp neighbors<\/span><\/li>\n<li style=\"font-weight: 400;\" aria-level=\"1\"><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">show ip route bgp<\/span><\/li>\n<\/ol>\n<p><b>Correct Answer: 1<\/b><\/p>\n<h3><b>Explanation<\/b><\/h3>\n<p><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">The show ip bgp command displays the BGP routing table and provides information about routes learned through BGP. The output can show available paths, next-hop information, AS Path, Origin, and indicators identifying the selected best path. This makes the command useful when analyzing why BGP selected one route instead of another. show ip bgp summary provides a concise overview of BGP sessions, while show ip bgp neighbors gives detailed peer information. show ip route bgp displays only BGP routes installed in the IP routing table. When troubleshooting BGP path selection, show ip bgp is therefore one of the most useful commands.<\/span><\/p>\n<h3><b>Question 349<\/b><\/h3>\n<p><b>Which OSPF LSA type advertises external routes in a normal OSPF area?<\/b><\/p>\n<ol>\n<li style=\"font-weight: 400;\" aria-level=\"1\"><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Type 2<\/span><\/li>\n<li style=\"font-weight: 400;\" aria-level=\"1\"><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Type 3<\/span><\/li>\n<li style=\"font-weight: 400;\" aria-level=\"1\"><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Type 5<\/span><\/li>\n<li style=\"font-weight: 400;\" aria-level=\"1\"><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Type 1<\/span><\/li>\n<\/ol>\n<p><b>Correct Answer: 3<\/b><\/p>\n<h3><b>Explanation<\/b><\/h3>\n<p><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Type 5 AS External LSAs advertise routes that have been redistributed into OSPF by an ASBR. These LSAs are normally flooded throughout the OSPF autonomous system, except where area types restrict external LSAs. Type 1 LSAs describe individual routers, Type 2 LSAs represent multiaccess networks, and Type 3 LSAs advertise inter-area networks. In an NSSA, external routes introduced inside the area use Type 7 LSAs instead. When troubleshooting OSPF redistribution, administrators should verify whether the ASBR is generating Type 5 LSAs and whether the destination area permits external LSAs. This helps identify area-type and redistribution-related routing problems.<\/span><\/p>\n<h3><b>Question 350<\/b><\/h3>\n<p><b>Which EIGRP feature can reduce the number of routing prefixes advertised to neighboring routers?<\/b><\/p>\n<ol>\n<li style=\"font-weight: 400;\" aria-level=\"1\"><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Variance<\/span><\/li>\n<li style=\"font-weight: 400;\" aria-level=\"1\"><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Summarization<\/span><\/li>\n<li style=\"font-weight: 400;\" aria-level=\"1\"><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Feasible successor<\/span><\/li>\n<li style=\"font-weight: 400;\" aria-level=\"1\"><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Query<\/span><\/li>\n<\/ol>\n<p><b>Correct Answer: 2<\/b><\/p>\n<h3><b>Explanation<\/b><\/h3>\n<p><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">EIGRP route summarization reduces the number of routing prefixes advertised to neighboring routers by combining multiple more-specific networks into a summarized prefix. Manual summarization can reduce routing-table size and routing-update traffic while also helping limit the scope of topology changes. Proper summarization can contribute to faster and more predictable convergence in larger networks. Variance is used for unequal-cost load balancing, while a feasible successor is an alternate route that satisfies the feasibility condition. Query is an EIGRP packet rather than a summarization feature. Route summarization is therefore a useful scalability mechanism for controlling the amount of routing information exchanged between EIGRP routers.<\/span><\/p>\n<h3><b>Question 351<\/b><\/h3>\n<p><b>Which BGP message is exchanged periodically to ensure that an established session remains active?<\/b><\/p>\n<ol>\n<li style=\"font-weight: 400;\" aria-level=\"1\"><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Open<\/span><\/li>\n<li style=\"font-weight: 400;\" aria-level=\"1\"><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Notification<\/span><\/li>\n<li style=\"font-weight: 400;\" aria-level=\"1\"><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Keepalive<\/span><\/li>\n<li style=\"font-weight: 400;\" aria-level=\"1\"><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Update<\/span><\/li>\n<\/ol>\n<p><b>Correct Answer: 3<\/b><\/p>\n<h3><b>Explanation<\/b><\/h3>\n<p><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">BGP Keepalive messages are exchanged periodically to maintain an established BGP session. They allow peers to verify that the session is still functioning even when no routing updates are being exchanged. If a router does not receive an appropriate message within the configured Hold Time, it can consider the BGP peer unavailable and terminate the session. Open messages are used to establish and negotiate BGP parameters, Update messages carry routing information, and Notification messages report serious errors. Keepalive behavior is therefore important for detecting failed BGP peers and maintaining stable sessions during periods when routing information does not change.<\/span><\/p>\n<h3><b>Question 352<\/b><\/h3>\n<p><b>Which OSPF command displays the current OSPF neighbors and their adjacency states?<\/b><\/p>\n<ol>\n<li style=\"font-weight: 400;\" aria-level=\"1\"><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">show ip ospf database<\/span><\/li>\n<li style=\"font-weight: 400;\" aria-level=\"1\"><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">show ip ospf neighbor<\/span><\/li>\n<li style=\"font-weight: 400;\" aria-level=\"1\"><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">show ip route ospf<\/span><\/li>\n<li style=\"font-weight: 400;\" aria-level=\"1\"><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">show ip ospf<\/span><\/li>\n<\/ol>\n<p><b>Correct Answer: 2<\/b><\/p>\n<h3><b>Explanation<\/b><\/h3>\n<p><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">The show ip ospf neighbor command displays OSPF neighbor relationships and their current states. The output typically includes the neighbor Router ID, priority, state, neighbor address, dead timer, and local interface. It is commonly used to determine whether OSPF adjacencies have formed successfully. States such as Init, 2-Way, ExStart, Exchange, Loading, and Full can provide clues about where an adjacency is failing. The database command focuses on LSAs, while show ip route ospf displays installed OSPF routes. show ip ospf provides general process information. For direct verification of OSPF neighbor states, show ip ospf neighbor is the appropriate command.<\/span><\/p>\n<h3><b>Question 353<\/b><\/h3>\n<p><b>Which EIGRP route is normally installed in the routing table as the preferred path?<\/b><\/p>\n<ol>\n<li style=\"font-weight: 400;\" aria-level=\"1\"><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Query<\/span><\/li>\n<li style=\"font-weight: 400;\" aria-level=\"1\"><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Feasible successor<\/span><\/li>\n<li style=\"font-weight: 400;\" aria-level=\"1\"><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Successor<\/span><\/li>\n<li style=\"font-weight: 400;\" aria-level=\"1\"><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Reported Distance<\/span><\/li>\n<\/ol>\n<p><b>Correct Answer: 3<\/b><\/p>\n<h3><b>Explanation<\/b><\/h3>\n<p><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">The EIGRP successor is the preferred route to a destination and is normally installed in the IP routing table. DUAL selects the successor based on the best available EIGRP metric. If an alternate route satisfies the feasibility condition, it can be retained as a feasible successor. When the primary successor fails, a feasible successor may immediately replace it, providing fast convergence. Reported Distance is a metric value advertised by a neighbor rather than a route type. Query is a control packet used during route discovery. Understanding the difference between successor and feasible successor is important when analyzing EIGRP convergence and failover behavior.<\/span><\/p>\n<h3><b>Question 354<\/b><\/h3>\n<p><b>Which BGP attribute is locally significant and is not advertised to external or internal BGP peers?<\/b><\/p>\n<ol>\n<li style=\"font-weight: 400;\" aria-level=\"1\"><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Local Preference<\/span><\/li>\n<li style=\"font-weight: 400;\" aria-level=\"1\"><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">MED<\/span><\/li>\n<li style=\"font-weight: 400;\" aria-level=\"1\"><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Weight<\/span><\/li>\n<li style=\"font-weight: 400;\" aria-level=\"1\"><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Origin<\/span><\/li>\n<\/ol>\n<p><b>Correct Answer: 3<\/b><\/p>\n<h3><b>Explanation<\/b><\/h3>\n<p><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Weight is a Cisco-specific BGP attribute that is locally significant to the router where it is configured. It is not advertised to BGP peers. A higher Weight is preferred, and because it is evaluated early in Cisco&#8217;s BGP best-path process, it can override the effect of other attributes on that particular router. Local Preference is propagated through iBGP and normally influences outbound traffic across the autonomous system. MED and Origin are carried with BGP route information. Weight is therefore useful when a routing preference should affect only one Cisco router rather than the entire autonomous system.<\/span><\/p>\n<h3><b>Question 355<\/b><\/h3>\n<p><b>Which OSPF LSA type is generated by an individual router to describe its links within an area?<\/b><\/p>\n<ol>\n<li style=\"font-weight: 400;\" aria-level=\"1\"><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Type 1<\/span><\/li>\n<li style=\"font-weight: 400;\" aria-level=\"1\"><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Type 3<\/span><\/li>\n<li style=\"font-weight: 400;\" aria-level=\"1\"><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Type 4<\/span><\/li>\n<li style=\"font-weight: 400;\" aria-level=\"1\"><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Type 5<\/span><\/li>\n<\/ol>\n<p><b>Correct Answer: 1<\/b><\/p>\n<h3><b>Explanation<\/b><\/h3>\n<p><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Type 1 Router LSAs are generated by individual OSPF routers to describe their links and directly connected OSPF networks within an area. These LSAs form a fundamental part of the link-state database and are used by the SPF algorithm to calculate paths. Every OSPF router generates its own Type 1 LSA, and the information is flooded throughout the local area. Type 2 LSAs represent multiaccess networks, Type 3 LSAs are generated by ABRs for inter-area networks, and Type 5 LSAs advertise external routes. When troubleshooting OSPF topology calculations, examining Type 1 LSAs can reveal how routers describe their local network connections.<\/span><\/p>\n<h3><b>Question 356<\/b><\/h3>\n<p><b>Which EIGRP mechanism allows a backup route to be selected immediately without querying neighbors when the primary route fails?<\/b><\/p>\n<ol>\n<li style=\"font-weight: 400;\" aria-level=\"1\"><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Split horizon<\/span><\/li>\n<li style=\"font-weight: 400;\" aria-level=\"1\"><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Feasible successor<\/span><\/li>\n<li style=\"font-weight: 400;\" aria-level=\"1\"><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Variance<\/span><\/li>\n<li style=\"font-weight: 400;\" aria-level=\"1\"><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Summarization<\/span><\/li>\n<\/ol>\n<p><b>Correct Answer: 2<\/b><\/p>\n<h3><b>Explanation<\/b><\/h3>\n<p><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">A feasible successor is an alternate EIGRP route that satisfies the feasibility condition and is already known to be loop-free. When the active successor fails, EIGRP can install the feasible successor without initiating the full Query process. This contributes to rapid convergence. The feasibility condition requires the neighboring router&#8217;s Reported Distance to be lower than the local Feasible Distance. Variance is used for unequal-cost load balancing, while split horizon controls route advertisement behavior. Summarization reduces the number of prefixes exchanged. Feasible successors are therefore an important EIGRP mechanism for minimizing convergence time following a primary-path failure.<\/span><\/p>\n<h3><b>Question 357<\/b><\/h3>\n<p><b>Which BGP attribute is generally preferred when the value is lower and is commonly used between neighboring autonomous systems?<\/b><\/p>\n<ol>\n<li style=\"font-weight: 400;\" aria-level=\"1\"><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Local Preference<\/span><\/li>\n<li style=\"font-weight: 400;\" aria-level=\"1\"><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">MED<\/span><\/li>\n<li style=\"font-weight: 400;\" aria-level=\"1\"><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Weight<\/span><\/li>\n<li style=\"font-weight: 400;\" aria-level=\"1\"><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Origin<\/span><\/li>\n<\/ol>\n<p><b>Correct Answer: 2<\/b><\/p>\n<h3><b>Explanation<\/b><\/h3>\n<p><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">MED is generally preferred when its value is lower during the applicable BGP comparison. It can be advertised to a neighboring autonomous system to suggest which connection should be used when multiple links exist between the same autonomous systems. MED is commonly associated with influencing inbound traffic toward an organization. Its effect depends on the receiving router&#8217;s BGP policies and comparison rules, so a lower MED does not guarantee that the corresponding path will always be selected. Local Preference and Weight are normally higher-is-better attributes, while Origin represents the method through which the route entered BGP. MED is therefore the appropriate lower-value attribute here.<\/span><\/p>\n<h3><b>Question 358<\/b><\/h3>\n<p><b>Which OSPF network type does not elect a DR or BDR because only two routers form the link?<\/b><\/p>\n<ol>\n<li style=\"font-weight: 400;\" aria-level=\"1\"><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Broadcast<\/span><\/li>\n<li style=\"font-weight: 400;\" aria-level=\"1\"><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Point-to-multipoint<\/span><\/li>\n<li style=\"font-weight: 400;\" aria-level=\"1\"><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Point-to-point<\/span><\/li>\n<li style=\"font-weight: 400;\" aria-level=\"1\"><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">NBMA<\/span><\/li>\n<\/ol>\n<p><b>Correct Answer: 3<\/b><\/p>\n<h3><b>Explanation<\/b><\/h3>\n<p><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">OSPF point-to-point networks do not require a Designated Router or Backup Designated Router because the network connects two routers directly. Without multiple routers sharing a common multiaccess segment, there is no need for a DR to reduce the number of adjacencies or represent the network in a Type 2 LSA. Broadcast and NBMA network types can use DR and BDR elections. Point-to-multipoint networks also operate differently and normally do not use DR\/BDR elections. Understanding the OSPF network type is important when troubleshooting neighbor formation because expected states and adjacency behavior depend on how the interface is operating.<\/span><\/p>\n<h3><b>Question 359<\/b><\/h3>\n<p><b>Which EIGRP command can display all known paths, including paths that are not currently successors?<\/b><\/p>\n<ol>\n<li style=\"font-weight: 400;\" aria-level=\"1\"><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">show ip eigrp topology<\/span><\/li>\n<li style=\"font-weight: 400;\" aria-level=\"1\"><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">show ip eigrp neighbors<\/span><\/li>\n<li style=\"font-weight: 400;\" aria-level=\"1\"><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">show ip eigrp interfaces<\/span><\/li>\n<li style=\"font-weight: 400;\" aria-level=\"1\"><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">show ip route<\/span><\/li>\n<\/ol>\n<p><b>Correct Answer: 1<\/b><\/p>\n<h3><b>Explanation<\/b><\/h3>\n<p><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">The show ip eigrp topology command provides information about paths stored in the EIGRP topology table. Depending on the command options and platform, it can show successor and alternate path information, including Feasible Distance and Reported Distance values. This makes it useful for analyzing why EIGRP selected one route and whether other paths are available. The neighbor command focuses on EIGRP adjacencies, while the interfaces command displays EIGRP interface information. The general routing-table command shows only routes selected for installation and forwarding. Therefore, the topology command is the appropriate tool when an administrator needs to investigate multiple EIGRP paths.<\/span><\/p>\n<h3><b>Question 360<\/b><\/h3>\n<p><b>Which BGP attribute identifies the method by which a route was introduced into the BGP routing system?<\/b><\/p>\n<ol>\n<li style=\"font-weight: 400;\" aria-level=\"1\"><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">AS Path<\/span><\/li>\n<li style=\"font-weight: 400;\" aria-level=\"1\"><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Origin<\/span><\/li>\n<li style=\"font-weight: 400;\" aria-level=\"1\"><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Next Hop<\/span><\/li>\n<li style=\"font-weight: 400;\" aria-level=\"1\"><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Local Preference<\/span><\/li>\n<\/ol>\n<p><b>Correct Answer: 2<\/b><\/p>\n<h3><b>Explanation<\/b><\/h3>\n<p><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">The BGP Origin attribute identifies how a route was introduced into the BGP routing system. Its common values are IGP, EGP, and Incomplete. IGP is generally preferred over EGP, while EGP is generally preferred over Incomplete when BGP reaches the Origin comparison stage. A route originated through a BGP network statement commonly receives an IGP origin, while redistributed routes commonly receive an Incomplete origin. AS Path identifies autonomous systems traversed, Next Hop identifies the forwarding destination, and Local Preference influences outbound path selection within an autonomous system. Understanding Origin values can help explain differences between otherwise similar BGP paths.<\/span><\/p>\n<p>&nbsp;<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>View Full Cisco CCNP 300-415 Exam Dumps and Practice Test Dumps. &nbsp; Question 341 Which EIGRP component determines whether an alternate path can be considered loop-free? Variance Feasibility condition Split horizon Route summarization Correct Answer: 2 Explanation The EIGRP feasibility condition determines whether an alternate path can be considered loop-free and therefore qualify as a [&hellip;]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":[],"categories":[1648,1647],"tags":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.examlabs.com\/certification\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/14786"}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.examlabs.com\/certification\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.examlabs.com\/certification\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.examlabs.com\/certification\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.examlabs.com\/certification\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=14786"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"https:\/\/www.examlabs.com\/certification\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/14786\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":14832,"href":"https:\/\/www.examlabs.com\/certification\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/14786\/revisions\/14832"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.examlabs.com\/certification\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=14786"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.examlabs.com\/certification\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=14786"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.examlabs.com\/certification\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=14786"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}