easyMultiple Choice
300-410 Practice Question: Runs the following command to troubleshoot a…
A network engineer runs the following command to troubleshoot a Policy-Based Routing (PBR) issue:
R1# show route-map PBR-MAP
route-map PBR-MAP, permit, sequence 10 Match clauses:
ip address (access-lists): 101
Set clauses:
ip next-hop 10.1.1.2
Policy routing matches: 50 packets, 6000 bytes
What does this output indicate?
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
✓
PBR is successfully forwarding matching traffic to 10.1.1.2.
The output shows that 50 packets have matched the route-map and have been policy-routed to next-hop 10.1.1.2. This indicates PBR is working.
Answer analysis
Option-by-option breakdown
For each option: why learners choose it and why it is or isn't the right answer here.
- ✓
PBR is successfully forwarding matching traffic to 10.1.1.2.
Why this is correct
The policy routing match counter shows 50 packets and 6000 bytes matched sequence 10, and the set clause directs those packets to next-hop 10.1.1.2. Traffic matching access list 101 is therefore being policy-routed successfully to that next hop.
- ✗
The next-hop 10.1.1.2 is not reachable.
Why it's wrong here
Next-hop reachability is not reported by show route-map; the match counter only confirms the policy was evaluated and the set clause applied. An unreachable next-hop would require checking the routing table or adjacency, not this output, which shows successful policy matches.
- ✗
The ACL 101 is misconfigured.
Why it's wrong here
ACL 101 is matching traffic, evidenced by 50 packets and 6000 bytes hitting the route map, so the access list is functioning. A misconfigured ACL would produce no matches or an error; the output confirms the match clause is operating as intended.
- ✗
PBR is not applied to any interface.
Why it's wrong here
The counter showing 50 packets and 6000 bytes matched proves the route map is being evaluated on traffic, so it must be attached to an interface via ip policy route-map. The absence of interface binding would be indicated by a zero match count, which is not the case here.
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 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.