You save $69.98
An Ethernet OSPFv2 adjacency reaches 2-WAY state between two DROTHER routers on a broadcast network. The elected DR and BDR are healthy. What does 2-WAY typically indicate here?
On a broadcast multiaccess segment, DROTHER–DROTHER routers may remain in 2-WAY while FULL adjacency forms to the DR and BDR.
A 2-WAY state between two DROTHER devices is often expected.
Mismatched subnet parameters are different from the normal two-way neighbor discovery state.
A stable DR/BDR election is not preempted simply because two DROTHER peers see each other.
On an OSPFv2 point-to-point link, `show ip ospf neighbor` shows neighbor state FULL. Which inference is justified?
FULL indicates completion of database exchange/synchronization between directly adjacent OSPF neighbors; it does not prove end-to-end application reachability.
Local process numbers need not match.
A neighbor database state does not prove remote forwarding policy or external reachability.
That condition describes INIT rather than FULL.
A router has two OSPFv2 paths to 10.60.0.0/16 in the same area and identical route type. The SPF path costs are 25 and 40. Which path is preferred?
For otherwise equivalent OSPF routes, lower accumulated OSPF cost is preferred; cost 25 beats cost 40.
OSPF chooses lower, not higher, total cost for equivalent destinations.
Process identifiers do not serve as route metrics.
Longest-prefix route matching governs forwarding; an unrelated /0 does not override a matching /16.
A network operator lowers OSPF cost on a backup link from 100 to 5 to shift traffic. Before and after the change, the prefix is learned with equal OSPF route type on both paths. Which verification best proves the intended path change?
The OSPF cost change should affect SPF path choice only if the route is comparable. Routing-table next hop and interface cost evidence verifies the actual forwarding consequence.
A hostname does not show selected OSPF route metrics or next hop.
Loopback reachability does not prove the target prefix now uses the intended OSPF path.
Matching process IDs do not determine OSPF link cost preferences.
A Cisco interface is configured for OSPFv2 broadcast operation on a shared Ethernet LAN. What is the purpose of a DR in this topology?
DR and BDR roles avoid requiring a FULL database adjacency among every pair of broadcast LAN routers; DROTHERs generally form FULL adjacencies to DR/BDR.
DR election does not provide link encryption.
OSPF DR is not the STP root bridge and does not forward end-user frames as a switch.
OSPF priority zero explicitly disables DR/BDR eligibility.
A DR election occurs among R1 priority 100, R2 priority 100, R3 priority 10, and R4 priority 0, all newly joined. R1 ID 10.0.0.2 and R2 ID 10.0.0.3. Which router should become BDR after the initial DR selection?
R2 and R1 tie on highest priority; R2 has the higher router ID and becomes DR, leaving R1 as best remaining eligible BDR candidate.
Priority 0 makes R4 ineligible for DR and BDR.
Higher eligible priority outranks lower candidates.
DR and BDR are distinct roles on different routers.
On an OSPFv2 broadcast segment, R2 is the elected DR and R1 the BDR. Engineer R3 checks `show ip ospf interface` on the VLAN. Which fields establish the current election roles?
`show ip ospf interface` reports network type, interface priority, DR and BDR identifiers and their interface addresses; these are stronger evidence than inferred election arithmetic.
The hostname is not the elected DR/BDR ID.
A local mask does not encode the DR identity; inspect the interface OSPF neighbor or DR/BDR fields.
MAC learning does not encode OSPF DR/BDR election results.
A point-to-point OSPFv2 link is configured and the operator wants proof that the two router interfaces are participating in area 0. Which verification is most directly appropriate?
Interface-level OSPF output reports process area, interface network type and timers; together with neighbor FULL it provides direct adjacency evidence.
Switch VLAN listings do not establish OSPF area assignment on routed interfaces.
ARP resolution may occur without a functioning OSPF adjacency.
An up interface does not prove OSPF has joined area 0.
R1 and R2 form a single-area OSPFv2 adjacency. R1 advertises 10.10.30.0/24 in area 0; R2 receives an OSPF route to the same prefix. Which command on R2 best confirms that the OSPF-learned route is installed?
Filtering the IPv4 routing table for OSPF routes shows prefixes actually selected for installation, including their next hops and metrics.
IOS uptime says nothing about whether the OSPF route is installed.
Clock accuracy does not establish routing-table entries.
A Layer 2 MAC table does not contain OSPF IPv4 destination routes.
A branch OSPFv2 neighbor is stuck in DOWN after the remote side is configured as passive-interface. The IPv4 link itself pings. What explains the absence of OSPF neighbors?
OSPF Hellos drive neighbor state formation; a passive-interface suppresses them despite underlying IP reachability.
ICMP reachability at Layer 3 does not guarantee OSPF control-plane Hellos.
Local OSPF process IDs need not be equal.
Priority zero affects election eligibility, not Hello generation.
An OSPFv2 router has several interfaces. The operator needs one fixed unique router identity that will not depend on future link address changes. Which process-level setting best meets the goal?
Explicit router-id configuration stabilizes identification independently of auto-selected physical/loopback addresses, subject to process application.
The auto-selected ID can change on a later process restart after addressing changes.
STP bridge priority is unrelated to OSPF routing identity.
Process ID is only a local config identifier and not the OSPF router ID.
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.
