hardMultiple Choice
300-410 Practice Question: Two routers are configured with EIGRP and have a…
Two routers are configured with EIGRP and have a neighbor relationship. One router has a route to 192.168.1.0/24 with metric 100. The other router has a route to the same prefix with metric 200. An engineer configures an offset-list on the first router to increase the metric of 192.168.1.0/24 by 50, expecting the second router to prefer its own route. Unexpectedly, the second router still prefers the first router's route after the offset. Which is the most likely explanation?
⚠ Common exam trap
300-410 often tests metric arithmetic with offset-lists — candidates assume any offset changes path preference without checking whether the new metric actually exceeds the competing route's metric.
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
✓
The offset-list increased the metric from 100 to 150, which is still lower than the second router's metric of 200, so the second router still prefers the first router's route.
The offset-list adds 50 to the metric of the matched route on the first router, changing its advertised metric from 100 to 150. Since 150 is still lower than the second router's local metric of 200, the second router continues to prefer the route learned from the first router. The offset was insufficient to make the second router's own route preferable.
Answer analysis
Option-by-option breakdown
For each option: why learners choose it and why it is or isn't the right answer here.
- ✓
The offset-list increased the metric from 100 to 150, which is still lower than the second router's metric of 200, so the second router still prefers the first router's route.
Why this is correct
Offset-lists add the configured value to the metric before advertisement. Raising 100 to 150 still beats the second router's local metric of 200, so its own route remains less preferred and the first router's route is still selected.
- ✗
The offset-list must be applied inbound on the second router to increase the metric of the received route.
Why it's wrong here
Applying the offset-list outbound on the first router already raises the metric the second router receives, so inbound configuration is unnecessary. Inbound offset-lists are correct when you must alter metrics of routes arriving from a neighbour.
- ✗
The offset-list command only affects feasible distance, not advertised distance, so the second router ignores it.
Why it's wrong here
An offset-list modifies the metric advertised to neighbours, so it does change the advertised distance; the second router's own metric of 200 still exceeds the first router's 150 after the offset. It is tempting because offset-lists genuinely manipulate EIGRP metrics, and would be the right tool if the local metric needed raising above a neighbour's advertised distance.
- ✗
The second router has a higher administrative distance for the route, so it always prefers the first router's route.
Why it's wrong here
Administrative distance compares routes from different routing protocols; both routes here are EIGRP, so distance is identical and irrelevant. AD would matter when choosing between, for example, an EIGRP and an OSPF route to the same prefix.
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
This 300-410 question is part of Courseiva's 1,401-question bank — original exam-style content with full explanations and wrong-answer analysis, never real exam questions or exam dumps. Learn why practice questions differ from exam dumps →
JA
Written and reviewed by Johnson Ajibi, MSc IT Security
Senior Network & Security Engineer · founder of Courseiva
Last reviewed September 2026 · checked against the official Cisco exam blueprint
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.