You save $69.98
R1 is directly connected to 10.80.0.0/24 and also has an installed static route to 10.80.0.128/25 via 192.0.2.6. For a destination 10.80.0.200, which installed prefix is chosen?
A /25 covers addresses 10.80.0.128–255 and is longer than /24; the installed /25 is the forwarding match. This assumes the next hop is already resolved as stated.
Connected AD applies when choosing between routes to the same prefix, not when a longer matching route exists.
Overlapping routes with different prefix lengths are not equivalent paths for ECMP selection.
A legitimate specific route can override a broader connected route if installed and valid; this is a routing-table specificity decision.
`show ip route` lists two next hops for OSPF route 10.50.0.0/24, each with the same OSPF metric, and both interfaces are up. What can the router do by default for packets to that prefix?
Equal eligible cost to the same prefix can support ECMP. Actual distribution is platform- and hashing-dependent, so one TCP flow need not split across links.
OSPF path selection favors lower cost, not the more expensive path.
Unequal administrative distance is not the criterion for equal-cost OSPF multipath; the eligible route candidates share OSPF source preference.
OSPF supports multiple equal-cost paths subject to platform limits and configuration; a single-next-hop rule is incorrect.
The routing table has 10.10.10.0/25 via R2 and 10.10.10.0/24 via R3. A packet is destined for 10.10.10.190. Both routes are installed and next hops work. Which route matches?
Prefix specificity is relevant only among routes that match the actual destination. .190 is outside 10.10.10.0/25 but inside 10.10.10.0/24.
A longer prefix must contain this packet's destination to win; the /25's address range does not.
10.10.10.190 belongs to private 10/8 and is covered by the installed /24; classful assumptions do not invalidate CIDR lookup.
Route overlap alone does not produce equal-cost forwarding; these routes differ in prefix and the /25 misses the destination.
A router forwards an IP datagram destined for 10.30.11.189. Its four installed routes are shown with usable next hops. Which route wins destination forwarding under longest-prefix match?
10.30.0.0/16 is the most-specific matching prefix for 10.30.11.189; this route is chosen even though less-specific routes also exist.
10.30.12.0/24 does not include the destination, so it cannot forward the packet.
0.0.0.0/0 matches, but prefix /16 has more bits than /0.
10.30.12.0/25 does not include the destination, so it cannot forward the packet.
Two OSPF routes reach the same prefix. Path A crosses links with outgoing OSPF costs 10 and 30; path B crosses links with costs 20 and 15. Which total-cost comparison is correct?
OSPF path cost accumulates across the chosen path. Adding 20+15 gives 35, which is less than 10+30=40.
OSPF compares cumulative path cost, not only the first hop’s interface metric.
Each path’s link costs add; neither path’s total is 30.
AD determines preference among route sources for identical prefixes and is not a subtraction term in OSPF path-cost computation.
Two OSPF candidates for prefix 192.0.2.0/24 have costs 10 via R2 and 35 via R3, and no other policies alter OSPF. Which route is best?
OSPF SPF cost differentiates eligible paths within the same protocol and prefix; 10 is less than 35, so R2 is the best-cost path.
Higher metric normally represents greater path cost, not better path quality, within OSPF.
Destination addresses define the prefix being reached; host-address ordering is not an OSPF path-selection tie-breaker.
Administrative distance is used across route sources; OSPF also uses its own cost metric for choosing paths.
A branch router has `S* 0.0.0.0/0 via 198.51.100.1` and `C 10.50.0.0/16`. A packet is destined for 203.0.113.9. The default's next hop is reachable. Which route forwards it?
203.0.113.9 does not belong to 10.50.0.0/16. The /0 default is therefore the only matching installed prefix and is used for forwarding.
A connected network route applies only to destinations in that network, regardless of its administrative distance.
A default route matches all IPv4 destinations not covered by a more-specific usable route.
Layer 3 routers do not discover arbitrary remote destinations by broadcasting bridged frames across interfaces.
R1's best route to 10.40.0.0/16 points to next-hop 192.0.2.2 out Ethernet0/0. R1 can ping 192.0.2.2, but its ARP entry is cleared. Before sending the next Ethernet unicast frame, what must happen?
IP routing selects the Layer 3 next hop, while Ethernet forwarding still needs that adjacent next hop's MAC. ARP resolves the L2 neighbor after the route lookup.
The remote destination is not on the connected Ethernet; ARP is directed at the selected local next-hop address.
Host-route rewriting does not remove Ethernet's need to address the next-hop frame.
Broadcast Ethernet destination addressing is not a substitute for the unicast next-hop MAC after resolution.
At an airport terminal, the branch support lead learns identical destination 192.0.2.192/26 from two eligible route sources with administrative distances 110 and 120. Which default IOS route-selection statement is correct?
For the identical prefix 192.0.2.192/26, administrative distance ranks competing route sources; lower AD 110 is preferred to 120. The RIB installs the best eligible source for that destination.
There is no threshold based on the numerical AD difference that creates multipath. Different source-preference values select the lower-AD candidate for this exact prefix.
Administrative distance is a preference cost with lower values preferred, not a higher-is-better score.
For identical eligible destination prefixes, administrative distance compares route-source preference in the opposite direction: AD 110 is preferred to AD 120, not vice versa.
A router receives an OSPF update for 10.90.0.0/16 but its expected outgoing interface is down and the route is absent from the installed IPv4 routing table. What must be checked before claiming packets use that route?
Control-plane knowledge alone does not guarantee a working forwarding entry. The route must be eligible and installed with a resolvable next hop.
A candidate advertisement may be in protocol databases but lack an eligible installed route.
Reference-bandwidth changes adjust cost computation and cannot restore forwarding or install a route through a down egress interface.
A blind duplex change can worsen the link; the stated issue needs route and interface verification.
Two route sources offer exactly 10.60.12.0/24: RIP AD 120 and OSPF AD 110. A separate static route offers 10.60.0.0/16 AD 1. What should a packet to 10.60.12.77 use?
IOS first selects among eligible sources to install a route for the /24, favoring OSPF over RIP by AD. Forwarding then selects the more specific installed /24 over /16.
A low-AD covering /16 does not supersede a valid more-specific /24 during destination forwarding.
For the same /24, the lower AD 110 route wins source selection over RIP AD 120.
Different prefix lengths and AD values do not create equal-cost path entries for the same destination.
or Guarantee your success by buying the full version which covers the full latest pool of questions. (760 Questions, Last Updated on Nov 4, 2026)
Please check your mailbox for a message from support@examlabs.com and follow the directions.
