A network engineer is troubleshooting MPLS LSP connectivity. The MPLS LDP session is up on both endpoints, but some MPLS labels are missing in the LFIB. Which configuration change would most likely resolve the issue?
This command ensures that LDP advertises labels for all FECs.
Why this answer
Option B is correct because the 'mpls ldp advertise-labels' command ensures that LDP advertises label bindings to its peers. If this is disabled (default is enabled, but can be overridden), LDP sessions may be up but no labels are distributed, resulting in missing labels in the LFIB. Re-enabling it forces LDP to send label mappings for all FECs, resolving the connectivity issue.
Exam trap
Cisco often tests the distinction between LDP session establishment (which can be up) and label advertisement (which can be suppressed via filters), leading candidates to overlook the 'advertise-labels' command and instead focus on interface-level MPLS enablement or protocol selection.
How to eliminate wrong answers
Option A is wrong because 'label protocol ldp' is used to select LDP as the label distribution protocol on a per-interface basis, but if LDP sessions are already up, this command is not needed and does not address missing label advertisements. Option C is wrong because 'mpls ip' enables MPLS forwarding on an interface, but if LDP sessions are up and labels are missing, the issue is with label advertisement, not MPLS enablement on interfaces. Option D is wrong because 'mpls ldp explicit-null' configures the use of explicit null labels (label 0) for certain FECs, which is a traffic-engineering optimization and does not cause missing labels in the LFIB; it would only affect label values, not their presence.