Question 1,124 of 2,011
hardMultiple ChoiceObjective-mapped
300-410 Practice Question: Configures an EEM applet to monitor…
A network engineer configures an EEM applet to monitor redistribution events using the event syslog pattern 'IP-4-ROUTING'. The applet is intended to log when a route is redistributed from OSPF into EIGRP. The redistribution is configured without a seed metric for EIGRP, and the route is not redistributed. The EEM applet does not trigger. Which is the most likely explanation?
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
✓
Redistribution into EIGRP without a seed metric fails silently, and no syslog message is generated.
When redistributing routes into EIGRP without a seed metric, the redistribution fails silently—no syslog message is generated. The EIGRP process drops the redistributed route because the default metric is not set. The 'IP-4-ROUTING' syslog message is only generated when a routing table change occurs due to redistribution, but since the route is not installed, no syslog is produced. The EEM applet will not trigger because there is no matching syslog event.
Answer analysis
Option-by-option breakdown
For each option: why learners choose it and why it is or isn't the right answer here.
- ✓
Redistribution into EIGRP without a seed metric fails silently, and no syslog message is generated.
Why this is correct
Correct. EIGRP requires a seed metric; without it, the route is not redistributed and no syslog is generated.
- ✗
The EEM applet must use 'event routing' to capture redistribution events.
Why it's wrong here
EEM does not have an 'event routing' trigger; syslog is the correct method.
- ✗
The syslog pattern 'IP-4-ROUTING' is incorrect; it should be 'IP-5-ROUTING'.
Why it's wrong here
The pattern is correct for routing table changes, but no change occurs.
- ✗
The redistribution is blocked by route tagging, preventing the syslog.
Why it's wrong here
Route tagging is not involved in this scenario.
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.
About these practice questions
Courseiva creates original exam-style practice questions with explanations and wrong-answer analysis. It does not publish real exam questions, exam dumps, or protected exam content. Learn why practice questions differ from exam dumps →
Last reviewed: Jun 18, 2026
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.
Question Discussion
Share a tip, memory trick, or ask about the reasoning behind this question. Do not post real exam questions, leaked content, braindumps, or copyrighted exam material. Comments are moderated and may be removed without notice.
Sign in to join the discussion.