Courseiva
mediumMultiple ChoiceObjective-mapped

300-410 Practice Question: Given the following configuration: ip cef !…

Given the following configuration:

ip cef

!

interface GigabitEthernet0/0
 ip address 10.1.1.1 255.255.255.252

mpls ip !

interface GigabitEthernet0/1
 ip address 10.2.2.1 255.255.255.252

mpls ip !

router ospf 1
 network 10.0.0.0 0.255.255.255 area 0

! mpls ldp router-id Loopback0 force !

interface Loopback0
 ip address 192.168.0.1 255.255.255.255

A network engineer notices that LDP sessions are not establishing. What is the most likely cause?

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 LDP router ID is not reachable because the loopback is not advertised in OSPF.

The loopback is not advertised in OSPF because the network statement 10.0.0.0 0.255.255.255 does not include 192.168.0.1. The neighbor cannot reach the LDP router ID, so LDP sessions fail. This is a common oversight.

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 OSPF network statement is too broad and causes routing issues.

    Why it's wrong here

    A broad network statement is fine; it advertises all interfaces within the range, but it does not include the loopback.

  • The LDP router ID is not reachable because the loopback is not advertised in OSPF.

    Why this is correct

    The loopback 192.168.0.1 is not in the OSPF domain, so neighbors cannot route to it. LDP uses the router ID as the transport address, and without reachability, sessions cannot establish.

  • The 'mpls ip' command is missing on Loopback0.

    Why it's wrong here

    Loopback interfaces do not need 'mpls ip' for LDP router ID; they only need to be reachable.

  • The 'force' keyword prevents LDP from using any other interface if Loopback0 is down.

    Why it's wrong here

    The 'force' keyword does not cause failure; it simply forces the router ID. The issue is reachability.

Visual reference

R1 R2 R3 R4 10 100 10 100 OSPF picks R1→R2→R4 (cost 20) over R1→R3→R4 (cost 200)

Quick reference

Routing Protocol Comparison

ProtocolMetricMax HopsAlgorithmType
RIP v2Hop count15Bellman-FordDistance vector
OSPFCost (bandwidth)UnlimitedDijkstra (SPF)Link state
EIGRPComposite metricUnlimitedDUALHybrid
IS-ISCostUnlimitedDijkstraLink state
BGPPolicy / attributesUnlimitedPath vectorPath 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 →

How Courseiva writes practice questions · Editorial policy

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.