mediumMultiple ChoiceObjective-mapped
300-410 Practice Question: Examine the following partial configuration on a…
Examine the following partial configuration on a PE router:
interface GigabitEthernet0/1 ip vrf forwarding CUSTOMER-A ip address 10.1.1.1 255.255.255.252
!
router bgp 65000 neighbor 192.168.1.1 remote-as 65000 neighbor 192.168.1.1 update-source Loopback0
! address-family ipv4 vrf CUSTOMER-A
neighbor 10.1.1.2 remote-as 65001 neighbor 10.1.1.2 activate
exit-address-family
What is the effect of this configuration?
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 eBGP session between PE and CE will be established successfully.
The configuration correctly assigns the interface to a VRF, then in BGP the neighbor under the VRF address-family is activated. However, the neighbor is directly connected on a /30 link, so a remote-as of 65001 is valid for an eBGP session. The configuration is correct and will establish an eBGP session with the CE router.
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 eBGP session between PE and CE will be established successfully.
Why this is correct
The VRF is defined, the interface is in the VRF, and the BGP neighbor is correctly configured under the VRF address-family. The neighbor IP is on the same subnet, so the eBGP session should come up.
- ✗
The BGP session will fail because the neighbor must be configured under the global BGP process.
Why it's wrong here
For VRF peers, the neighbor must be configured under the VRF address-family, not the global BGP process. This is correct.
- ✗
The BGP session will fail because the neighbor remote-as must match the AS of the PE router.
Why it's wrong here
The CE router is in a different AS (65001), so eBGP is appropriate. The remote-as must match the CE's AS, which is 65001.
- ✗
The BGP session will fail because the update-source is not specified for the VRF neighbor.
Why it's wrong here
The update-source is only needed for the iBGP session to the route reflector; the VRF neighbor uses the interface IP by default, which is correct.
Go deeper
Related to this question
About these practice questions
This 300-410 question is part of Courseiva's 1,966-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 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.