mediumMultiple ChoiceObjective-mapped
300-410 Practice Question: Runs the following command to troubleshoot an…
A network engineer runs the following command to troubleshoot an Administrative Distance issue:
R1# show ip eigrp topology 192.168.3.0/24 all-links
IP-EIGRP (AS 100): Topology entry for 192.168.3.0/24 State is Passive, Query origin flag is 1, 1 Successor(s), FD is 30720 Routing Descriptor Blocks:
10.1.1.2 (GigabitEthernet0/0), from 10.1.1.2, Send flag is 0x0
Composite metric is (30720/28160), Route is Internal Vector metric: Minimum bandwidth is 100000 Kbit Total delay is 2000 microseconds Reliability is 255/255 Load is 1/255 Minimum MTU is 1500 Hop count is 1
10.1.2.2 (GigabitEthernet0/1), from 10.1.2.2, Send flag is 0x0
Composite metric is (30720/28160), Route is Internal Vector metric: Minimum bandwidth is 100000 Kbit Total delay is 2000 microseconds Reliability is 255/255 Load is 1/255 Minimum MTU is 1500 Hop count is 1
What does this output indicate?
Answer choices
Why each option matters
Answer the question above first, then reveal the full breakdown to understand why each option is right or wrong.
Correct answer & explanation
✓
Both paths are feasible successors and will be used for load balancing.
The output shows two equal-cost paths to the same network, both with the same composite metric and FD. This indicates that EIGRP is load balancing across these two links, but the administrative distance is not directly shown here; it's about the topology table.
Answer analysis
Option-by-option breakdown
For each option: why learners choose it and why it is or isn't the right answer here.
- ✓
Both paths are feasible successors and will be used for load balancing.
Why this is correct
Both paths have the same metric and meet the feasibility condition (reported distance less than FD), so they are successors and will be used for load balancing.
- ✗
Only the first path is used because it has a lower administrative distance.
Why it's wrong here
Administrative distance is not shown in EIGRP topology; both paths are from the same protocol, so AD is the same.
- ✗
The second path is a feasible successor but not used because the first path has a better metric.
Why it's wrong here
Both have the same metric, so both are successors.
- ✗
The output indicates a routing loop because there are two paths with the same metric.
Why it's wrong here
Equal-cost paths are normal and do not indicate a loop.
Visual reference
Quick reference
Routing Protocol Comparison
| Protocol | Metric | Max Hops | Algorithm | Type |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| RIP v2 | Hop count | 15 | Bellman-Ford | Distance vector |
| OSPF | Cost (bandwidth) | Unlimited | Dijkstra (SPF) | Link state |
| EIGRP | Composite metric | Unlimited | DUAL | Hybrid |
| IS-IS | Cost | Unlimited | Dijkstra | Link state |
| BGP | Policy / attributes | Unlimited | Path vector | Path vector |
RIP's 15-hop limit makes it unsuitable for large networks. OSPF and EIGRP dominate modern enterprise deployments.
Go deeper
Related to this question
About these practice questions
Courseiva writes every 300-410 question from scratch — 1,966 in total, each with an explanation and a wrong-answer breakdown. None are copied from real exams or dumps. Learn why practice questions differ from exam dumps →
JA
Written by Johnson Ajibi, MSc IT Security
Senior Network & Security Engineer · founder of Courseiva
This 300-410 practice question is part of Courseiva's free Cisco certification practice question bank. Courseiva provides original exam-style practice questions with explanations, topic-based practice, mock exams, readiness tracking, and study analytics to help learners prepare for the 300-410 exam.