mediumMultiple 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# debug ip policy
Policy routing debugging is on R1#
*Mar 1 00:10:45.456: IP: s=172.16.1.5 (FastEthernet0/0), d=8.8.8.8, len 64, policy match *Mar 1 00:10:45.456: IP: s=172.16.1.5 (FastEthernet0/0), d=8.8.8.8, len 64, policy routed *Mar 1 00:10:45.456: IP: FastEthernet0/0 to Serial0/0 10.1.1.2
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
✓
The packet was successfully policy-routed to 10.1.1.2 via Serial0/0.
The debug shows a packet from 172.16.1.5 to 8.8.8.8 that matched the policy and was routed out of Serial0/0 to next-hop 10.1.1.2. This indicates successful PBR operation.
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 packet was successfully policy-routed to 10.1.1.2 via Serial0/0.
Why this is correct
The debug lines show a policy match, then policy routed, then the forwarding decision FastEthernet0/0 to Serial0/0 with next hop 10.1.1.2. This confirms the route-map matched the packet and forwarded it via the PBR next hop rather than the routing table.
- ✗
The packet was dropped due to no matching route.
Why it's wrong here
The lines 'policy match' and 'policy routed' confirm a route-map matched and forwarding proceeded, so no drop occurred. It tempts because missing routes are a frequent PBR fault, and would be correct if the output showed the packet failing to match any route-map sequence.
- ✗
The next-hop 10.1.1.2 is unreachable.
Why it's wrong here
The output shows the packet successfully policy routed out Serial0/0 to 10.1.1.2; an unreachable next-hop would log no route to host or encapsulation failure instead. It tempts because PBR failures often stem from dead next-hops, and would be correct had the trace shown the packet discarded after matching.
- ✗
The route-map is misconfigured with wrong ACL.
Why it's wrong here
The debug output shows a policy match and successful policy routing to Serial0/0, so the route-map ACL matched and the packet was forwarded as intended; nothing indicates a wrong ACL. A wrong ACL would instead produce no match and fall through to normal destination routing.
Go deeper
Related to this question
About these practice questions
Courseiva writes every 300-410 question from scratch — 1,401 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 →
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.