hardMultiple ChoiceObjective-mapped
300-410 Practice Question: An engineer configures EIGRP named mode with an…
An engineer configures EIGRP named mode with an offset-list applied to the EIGRP topology table. The offset-list increases the metric of a route learned from a neighbor. However, the route is still used as the successor even though the offset-list increased its metric above the feasible distance (FD) of another route. Which is the most likely explanation?
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 offset-list only affects the advertised distance (AD), not the feasible distance (FD).
In EIGRP named mode, the offset-list is applied to the route's metric in the topology table, but it does not affect the feasible distance (FD) calculation. The FD is computed from the original metric before the offset. The successor is chosen based on the FD, not the offset metric, so the route remains the successor.
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 offset-list is applied to the wrong interface; it must be applied to the outgoing interface.
Why it's wrong here
Offset-list can be applied in or out; the issue is not interface-specific.
- ✓
The offset-list only affects the advertised distance (AD), not the feasible distance (FD).
Why this is correct
Offset-list modifies the metric of the route but does not update the FD, which is the metric of the best path at the time of learning.
- ✗
The offset-list is applied in classic mode, but the router is running named mode.
Why it's wrong here
Named mode supports offset-list; the behavior is the same.
- ✗
The offset-list value is too small to change the successor; a larger value is needed.
Why it's wrong here
Even a large offset does not affect FD; the successor remains based on FD.
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.