hardMultiple ChoiceObjective-mapped
300-410 Practice Question: A router R1 is redistributing BGP routes into…
A router R1 is redistributing BGP routes into OSPF, but some prefixes are missing. Router R1 has the following relevant configuration: router bgp 65000 neighbor 10.1.1.2 remote-as 65001 address-family ipv4 unicast neighbor 10.1.1.2 activate network 172.16.0.0 mask 255.255.255.0 router ospf 1 redistribute bgp 65000 subnets metric 100 Router R2 shows: show ip ospf database external 172.16.0.0 OSPF Router with ID 10.1.1.1 Type-5 AS External Link States LS age: 600 Options: (No TOS-capability, DC) LS Type: AS External Link Link State ID: 172.16.0.0 Advertising Router: 10.1.1.1 LS Seq Number: 80000001 Checksum: 0x1234 Length: 36 Network Mask: /24 Metric Type: 2 (Larger than any valid route) TOS: 0 Metric: 16777215 Forward Address: 0.0.0.0 External Route Tag: 0 What is the root 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 BGP route 172.16.0.0/24 is not in the routing table; check BGP table and next-hop reachability.
The metric of 16777215 (max) indicates the route is unreachable. This happens when BGP route is not valid (e.g., missing next-hop reachability) or when route-map sets metric to max. The BGP route may not be installed in routing table due to missing network statement or next-hop issue. The correct fix is to ensure BGP route is valid and reachable.
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 BGP route 172.16.0.0/24 is not in the routing table; check BGP table and next-hop reachability.
Why this is correct
OSPF redistributes only routes from routing table; if BGP route is not installed, OSPF may inject a default or max-metric route.
- ✗
The metric 100 is too low; increase to match OSPF cost.
Why it's wrong here
Metric value does not cause missing routes; the max metric indicates a problem.
- ✗
The subnets keyword is missing; add it to redistribute classful routes.
Why it's wrong here
Subnets is present; missing it would not cause max metric.
- ✗
The OSPF process ID is mismatched; use process 1 on both routers.
Why it's wrong here
Process ID is local; mismatch does not affect redistribution.
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
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.