VRF-Lite practice questions

A network engineer is troubleshooting a VRF-Lite setup where two customer VRFs (VRF_A and VRF_B) are configured on a router. The engineer notices that routes from VRF_A are appearing in the routing table of VRF_B, causing traffic misdirection. The router is running IOS-XE 17.3. What is the most likely cause of this issue?

Trap 1: The router has 'ip routing' disabled globally.

Disabling IP routing would prevent all routing, not just cross-VRF route sharing.

Trap 2: The 'ip vrf forwarding' command is missing on the interfaces.

Missing VRF forwarding on interfaces would prevent traffic from entering the correct VRF, but would not cause cross-VRF route sharing.

Trap 3: The router is running OSPF with the same process ID in both VRFs.

OSPF process IDs are local to the router and do not cause cross-VRF route sharing.

A
The router has 'ip routing' disabled globally.
Why wrong: Disabling IP routing would prevent all routing, not just cross-VRF route sharing.
B
The 'route-target import' and 'route-target export' commands are misconfigured, causing VRF_A routes to be imported into VRF_B.
Incorrect route-target configuration can lead to unintended route leaking between VRFs.
C
The 'ip vrf forwarding' command is missing on the interfaces.
Why wrong: Missing VRF forwarding on interfaces would prevent traffic from entering the correct VRF, but would not cause cross-VRF route sharing.
D
The router is running OSPF with the same process ID in both VRFs.
Why wrong: OSPF process IDs are local to the router and do not cause cross-VRF route sharing.

Review the full OSPF breakdown →

Question 2mediummultiple choice

A network engineer is troubleshooting a VRF-Lite configuration on a Cisco router. The router has two VRFs (VRF_RED and VRF_BLUE) configured with OSPF as the routing protocol. The engineer notices that OSPF neighborships are not forming between routers in VRF_RED. The 'show ip ospf neighbor' command shows no neighbors. What is the most likely cause?

Trap 1: The OSPF process ID is not unique across VRFs.

OSPF process IDs can be the same across VRFs without issues.

Trap 2: The interfaces in VRF_RED are missing the 'ip ospf network…

While this could affect neighbor formation, it is not the most common cause for no neighbors at all.

Trap 3: The 'router-id' command is missing in the OSPF process.

While a router ID is required, OSPF can automatically select one from the highest loopback or interface IP.

A
The OSPF process ID is not unique across VRFs.
Why wrong: OSPF process IDs can be the same across VRFs without issues.
B
The interfaces in VRF_RED are missing the 'ip ospf network point-to-point' command.
Why wrong: While this could affect neighbor formation, it is not the most common cause for no neighbors at all.
C
The OSPF process is not configured with the 'vrf VRF_RED' command.
Without the VRF association in the OSPF process, OSPF will not form neighborships on interfaces belonging to that VRF.
D
The 'router-id' command is missing in the OSPF process.
Why wrong: While a router ID is required, OSPF can automatically select one from the highest loopback or interface IP.

Open the full VLAN trunking answer →

Question 3hardmultiple choice

A network engineer is troubleshooting a VRF-Lite deployment where two routers are connected via a trunk link. Each router has two VRFs (VRF_A and VRF_B). The engineer configures subinterfaces on the trunk link, assigning each subinterface to a different VRF. However, traffic between the two routers for VRF_A is not working. The 'show vrf' command shows the VRFs are active. What is the most likely issue?

Trap 1: The 'ip vrf forwarding VRF_A' command is missing on the main…

VRF forwarding is applied on subinterfaces, not the main interface, for trunk links.

Trap 2: The 'no ip routing' command is configured globally.

Disabling IP routing would affect all traffic, not just VRF_A.

Trap 3: The 'mtu' command is set differently on the two subinterfaces.

MTU mismatch could cause packet drops, but it is less likely than a VLAN mismatch for complete traffic failure.

A
The subinterface on Router1 is configured with 'encapsulation dot1q 10', but the subinterface on Router2 is configured with 'encapsulation dot1q 20'.
Mismatched VLAN IDs prevent the Layer 2 frames from being correctly tagged and forwarded between the VRFs.
B
The 'ip vrf forwarding VRF_A' command is missing on the main interface.
Why wrong: VRF forwarding is applied on subinterfaces, not the main interface, for trunk links.
C
The 'no ip routing' command is configured globally.
Why wrong: Disabling IP routing would affect all traffic, not just VRF_A.
D
The 'mtu' command is set differently on the two subinterfaces.
Why wrong: MTU mismatch could cause packet drops, but it is less likely than a VLAN mismatch for complete traffic failure.

Open the full BGP breakdown →

Question 4hardmultiple choice

A network engineer is troubleshooting a VRF-Lite scenario where a router is configured with two VRFs (VRF_X and VRF_Y). The engineer notices that routes from VRF_X are not being advertised to the neighbor router via eBGP. The BGP configuration includes 'neighbor 10.1.1.2 remote-as 65002' under the VRF_X BGP address-family. The 'show bgp vpnv4 unicast all neighbors' command shows the BGP session is established. What is the most likely cause?

Trap 1: The BGP session is not using the correct update-source interface.

While update-source is important, the session is already established, so this is not the issue.

Trap 2: The 'maximum-paths' command is set to 1.

Maximum-paths affects load balancing, not route advertisement.

Trap 3: The 'bgp router-id' command is missing.

A router ID is required, but BGP will automatically select one if not configured.

A
The 'network' command for the prefix is configured under the global BGP configuration, not under the VRF address-family.
For VRF-Lite, the network command must be under the VRF address-family to advertise routes from that VRF.
B
The BGP session is not using the correct update-source interface.
Why wrong: While update-source is important, the session is already established, so this is not the issue.
C
The 'maximum-paths' command is set to 1.
Why wrong: Maximum-paths affects load balancing, not route advertisement.
D
The 'bgp router-id' command is missing.
Why wrong: A router ID is required, but BGP will automatically select one if not configured.

Question 5mediummultiple choice

A network engineer is troubleshooting a VRF-Lite setup where a router is configured with VRF_GREEN. The engineer pings the gateway IP of a host in VRF_GREEN from the router, but the ping fails. The 'show ip route vrf VRF_GREEN' command shows the connected network for the host's subnet. The 'show ip interface brief' shows the interface is up/up. What is the most likely cause?

Trap 1: The host's default gateway is not set to the router's interface IP…

This would cause the host to not send traffic to the router, but the router's ping to the host should still work if the host responds to ARP.

Trap 2: The router's interface in VRF_GREEN has 'ip proxy-arp' disabled.

Proxy ARP is not needed for direct communication within the same subnet.

Trap 3: The 'ip routing' command is disabled in VRF_GREEN.

IP routing is a global command and cannot be disabled per VRF.

A
The host's default gateway is not set to the router's interface IP in VRF_GREEN.
Why wrong: This would cause the host to not send traffic to the router, but the router's ping to the host should still work if the host responds to ARP.
B
The router's interface in VRF_GREEN has 'ip proxy-arp' disabled.
Why wrong: Proxy ARP is not needed for direct communication within the same subnet.
C
The host's IP address is not in the same subnet as the router's interface IP in VRF_GREEN.
If the host's IP is in a different subnet, the router will not have a connected route for that host, and ARP will fail.
D
The 'ip routing' command is disabled in VRF_GREEN.
Why wrong: IP routing is a global command and cannot be disabled per VRF.

Question 6mediummultiple choice

A network engineer is troubleshooting a VRF-Lite configuration where a router is using RIP as the routing protocol in VRF_BLUE. The engineer notices that RIP routes are not being learned from a neighbor router. The 'show ip rip database vrf VRF_BLUE' shows no entries. The 'show ip vrf interfaces VRF_BLUE' shows the correct interface. What is the most likely cause?

Trap 1: The 'version 2' command is missing under the VRF address-family.

RIPv1 can still learn routes, though it is less common.

Trap 2: The 'no auto-summary' command is missing.

Auto-summary could cause route summarization but not complete failure to learn routes.

Trap 3: The 'timers basic' command is set to a very low value.

Timer misconfiguration could cause route flapping, but not total absence of routes.

A
The 'network' command is configured under the global RIP process, not under the VRF address-family.
For RIP to operate in a VRF, the network command must be under the VRF address-family.
B
The 'version 2' command is missing under the VRF address-family.
Why wrong: RIPv1 can still learn routes, though it is less common.
C
The 'no auto-summary' command is missing.
Why wrong: Auto-summary could cause route summarization but not complete failure to learn routes.
D
The 'timers basic' command is set to a very low value.
Why wrong: Timer misconfiguration could cause route flapping, but not total absence of routes.

Question 7easymultiple choice

A network engineer is troubleshooting a VRF-Lite deployment where a router is configured with VRF_ORANGE. The engineer attempts to configure a static route in VRF_ORANGE using the command 'ip route vrf VRF_ORANGE 192.168.10.0 255.255.255.0 10.1.1.1', but the route does not appear in the routing table. The 'show ip route vrf VRF_ORANGE' does not show the static route. What is the most likely cause?

Trap 1: The 'ip classless' command is disabled.

Classless routing is enabled by default and does not affect static route installation per VRF.

Trap 2: The static route is missing the 'permanent' keyword.

The permanent keyword is optional and not required for the route to be installed.

Trap 3: The router has 'no ip routing' configured.

Disabling IP routing would prevent all routing, not just static routes in a VRF.

A
The next-hop IP address 10.1.1.1 is not reachable in VRF_ORANGE.
The static route will only be installed if the next-hop is reachable via a connected or dynamic route in the same VRF.
B
The 'ip classless' command is disabled.
Why wrong: Classless routing is enabled by default and does not affect static route installation per VRF.
C
The static route is missing the 'permanent' keyword.
Why wrong: The permanent keyword is optional and not required for the route to be installed.
D
The router has 'no ip routing' configured.
Why wrong: Disabling IP routing would prevent all routing, not just static routes in a VRF.

Study the full EIGRP explanation →

Question 8hardmultiple choice

A network engineer is troubleshooting a VRF-Lite setup where two routers are connected via a serial link. Each router has VRF_SALES configured. The engineer configures EIGRP in VRF_SALES. The 'show ip eigrp vrf VRF_SALES neighbors' shows no neighbors. The 'show ip eigrp vrf VRF_SALES interfaces' shows the serial interface is passive. What is the most likely cause?

Trap 1: The 'network' command for the serial interface's subnet is missing.

Missing network command would prevent EIGRP from running on the interface, but the interface would not show as passive.

Trap 2: The 'autonomous-system' number is different on the two routers.

Different AS numbers would prevent neighbor formation, but the interface would still be active, not passive.

Trap 3: The 'metric weights' command is misconfigured.

Metric weights affect route calculation, not neighbor discovery.

A
The 'passive-interface default' command is configured under the EIGRP process for VRF_SALES.
This command makes all interfaces passive by default, and if the serial interface is not explicitly set to no passive, it will remain passive.
B
The 'network' command for the serial interface's subnet is missing.
Why wrong: Missing network command would prevent EIGRP from running on the interface, but the interface would not show as passive.
C
The 'autonomous-system' number is different on the two routers.
Why wrong: Different AS numbers would prevent neighbor formation, but the interface would still be active, not passive.
D
The 'metric weights' command is misconfigured.
Why wrong: Metric weights affect route calculation, not neighbor discovery.

Question 9hardmultiple choice

A network engineer is troubleshooting a VRF-Lite configuration on a Cisco router. The router has two VRFs (VRF_CUSTOMER_A and VRF_CUSTOMER_B). The engineer notices that traffic from VRF_CUSTOMER_A is being routed to the wrong next-hop, causing connectivity issues. The 'show ip route vrf VRF_CUSTOMER_A' shows a route to the destination via a next-hop that belongs to VRF_CUSTOMER_B. What is the most likely cause?

Trap 1: The router has a default route that points to the next-hop in…

A default route would only be used if no specific route exists, and the route in question is specific.

Trap 2: The 'ip cef' command is disabled globally.

Disabling CEF would affect performance but not cause cross-VRF route selection.

Trap 3: The 'ip vrf forwarding' command is applied to the same physical…

An interface can only belong to one VRF; applying it to both would cause an error.

A
The 'route-target import' command in VRF_CUSTOMER_A is importing routes from VRF_CUSTOMER_B.
This causes routes from VRF_CUSTOMER_B to appear in VRF_CUSTOMER_A's routing table, leading to incorrect next-hop selection.
B
The router has a default route that points to the next-hop in VRF_CUSTOMER_B.
Why wrong: A default route would only be used if no specific route exists, and the route in question is specific.
C
The 'ip cef' command is disabled globally.
Why wrong: Disabling CEF would affect performance but not cause cross-VRF route selection.
D
The 'ip vrf forwarding' command is applied to the same physical interface for both VRFs.
Why wrong: An interface can only belong to one VRF; applying it to both would cause an error.

Question 10mediummultiple choice

A network engineer runs the following command on Router R1:

R1# show ip vrf interfaces
Interface   VRF          IP Address    Protocol

GigabitEthernet0/0 BLUE 10.1.1.1 up GigabitEthernet0/1 BLUE 10.1.2.1 up GigabitEthernet0/2 RED 192.168.1.1 up Loopback0 BLUE 10.0.0.1 up Loopback1 RED 192.168.0.1 up

Based on this output, which statement is correct?

Trap 1: All interfaces are in the global routing table.

The output explicitly lists interfaces under VRFs BLUE and RED, not the global table.

Trap 2: Loopback0 is in VRF RED.

Loopback0 is in VRF BLUE, not RED.

Trap 3: GigabitEthernet0/1 has IP address 10.1.2.2.

The output shows 10.1.2.1 for GigabitEthernet0/1.

A
All interfaces are in the global routing table.
Why wrong: The output explicitly lists interfaces under VRFs BLUE and RED, not the global table.
B
GigabitEthernet0/2 is in VRF RED with IP address 192.168.1.1.
The output shows GigabitEthernet0/2 is in VRF RED with IP 192.168.1.1 and protocol up.
C
Loopback0 is in VRF RED.
Why wrong: Loopback0 is in VRF BLUE, not RED.
D
GigabitEthernet0/1 has IP address 10.1.2.2.
Why wrong: The output shows 10.1.2.1 for GigabitEthernet0/1.

Review the full OSPF breakdown →

Question 11hardmultiple choice

A network engineer runs the following command on Router R1:

R1# show ip route vrf BLUE

Codes: C - connected, S - static, R - RIP, M - mobile, B - BGP D - EIGRP, EX - EIGRP external, O - OSPF, IA - OSPF inter area N1 - OSPF NSSA external type 1, N2 - OSPF NSSA external type 2 E1 - OSPF external type 1, E2 - OSPF external type 2 i - IS-IS, su - IS-IS summary, L1 - IS-IS level-1, L2 - IS-IS level-2 ia - IS-IS inter area, * - candidate default, U - per-user static route o - ODR, P - periodic downloaded static route, H - NHRP, l - LISP a - application route + - replicated route, % - next hop override

Gateway of last resort is not set

10.0.0.0/8 is variably subnetted, 3 subnets, 2 masks
C        10.1.1.0/24 is directly connected, GigabitEthernet0/0
C        10.1.2.0/24 is directly connected, GigabitEthernet0/1
O        10.2.0.0/16 [110/20] via 10.1.1.2, 00:00:15, GigabitEthernet0/0

Based on this output, what is the problem?

Trap 1: The OSPF route 10.2.0.0/16 has a next hop of 10.1.1.2, which is…

The next hop is reachable via the connected interface GigabitEthernet0/0.

Trap 2: The VRF BLUE has no default route, which is a problem.

Not having a default route is not necessarily a problem; it depends on the design.

Trap 3: The connected routes are not in the routing table.

They are present as shown.

A
The OSPF route 10.2.0.0/16 has a next hop of 10.1.1.2, which is unreachable.
Why wrong: The next hop is reachable via the connected interface GigabitEthernet0/0.
B
The OSPF route was learned 15 seconds ago, indicating a recent flap.
The age of 00:00:15 suggests the route was recently installed, which could indicate a flapping OSPF neighbor or route instability.
C
The VRF BLUE has no default route, which is a problem.
Why wrong: Not having a default route is not necessarily a problem; it depends on the design.
D
The connected routes are not in the routing table.
Why wrong: They are present as shown.

Open the full BGP breakdown →

Question 12mediummultiple choice

A network engineer runs the following command on Router R1:

R1# show ip bgp vpnv4 vrf RED summary

BGP router identifier 192.168.0.1, local AS number 65001 BGP table version is 5, main routing table version 5 4 network entries using 576 bytes of memory 4 path entries using 320 bytes of memory 2/1 BGP path/bestpath attribute entries using 320 bytes of memory 0 BGP route-map cache entries using 0 bytes of memory 0 BGP filter-list cache entries using 0 bytes of memory BGP using 1216 total bytes of memory BGP activity 4/0 prefixes, 4/0 paths, scan interval 60 secs

Neighbor        V           AS MsgRcvd MsgSent   TblVer  InQ OutQ Up/Down  State/PfxRcd
10.1.1.2        4        65001      23      25        5    0    0 00:12:34        2
10.1.2.2        4        65002      18      20        5    0    0 00:10:15        1

Based on this output, which statement is correct?

Trap 1: Neighbor 10.1.2.2 is in the Idle state.

The state shows 1 prefix received, meaning it's established.

Trap 2: The local AS number is 65002.

The local AS is 65001 as shown in the first line.

Trap 3: Neighbor 10.1.1.2 is in AS 65002.

Neighbor 10.1.1.2 is in AS 65001.

A
Both BGP neighbors are in the Established state.
The State/PfxRcd column shows numbers (2 and 1), indicating established state with prefixes received.
B
Neighbor 10.1.2.2 is in the Idle state.
Why wrong: The state shows 1 prefix received, meaning it's established.
C
The local AS number is 65002.
Why wrong: The local AS is 65001 as shown in the first line.
D
Neighbor 10.1.1.2 is in AS 65002.
Why wrong: Neighbor 10.1.1.2 is in AS 65001.

Study the full EIGRP explanation →

Question 13hardmultiple choice

A network engineer runs the following command on Router R1:

R1# show ip eigrp vrf RED neighbors

EIGRP-IPv4 Neighbors for AS(100) VRF RED H Address Interface Hold Uptime SRTT RTO Q Seq (sec) (ms) Cnt Num 0 192.168.1.2 Gi0/2 13 00:15:30 12 200 0 45 1 192.168.2.2 Gi0/3 12 00:14:20 15 200 0 32

Based on this output, what is the problem?

Trap 1: The EIGRP neighbors are not exchanging routes because the Seq…

Seq numbers are normal and indicate sequence numbers of last packets received.

Trap 2: Both neighbors are in the Init state.

The 'H' column shows 0 and 1, and the state is not shown because it is normal; Init would be indicated by 'Init' in the output.

Trap 3: The hold time of 13 seconds indicates a problem.

Hold time of 13 seconds is within normal range (default 15).

A
The EIGRP neighbors are not exchanging routes because the Seq numbers are low.
Why wrong: Seq numbers are normal and indicate sequence numbers of last packets received.
B
Both neighbors are in the Init state.
Why wrong: The 'H' column shows 0 and 1, and the state is not shown because it is normal; Init would be indicated by 'Init' in the output.
C
The EIGRP adjacency is functioning correctly.
The neighbors are up with low SRTT and no Q count, indicating stable adjacencies.
D
The hold time of 13 seconds indicates a problem.
Why wrong: Hold time of 13 seconds is within normal range (default 15).

Review the full OSPF breakdown →

Question 14mediummultiple choice

A network engineer runs the following command on Router R1:

R1# show ip ospf neighbor vrf BLUE

Neighbor ID     Pri   State           Dead Time   Address         Interface
10.0.0.2          1   FULL/DR        00:00:32    10.1.1.2        GigabitEthernet0/0
10.0.0.3          1   2WAY/DROTHER   00:00:35    10.1.2.2        GigabitEthernet0/1

Based on this output, which statement is correct?

Trap 1: Neighbor 10.0.0.3 is not forming a full adjacency because it is a…

DROTHERs remain in 2WAY state and do not need to become FULL; this is normal.

Trap 2: Neighbor 10.0.0.2 is the Backup Designated Router.

The state shows FULL/DR, meaning it is the Designated Router.

Trap 3: Both neighbors are in the FULL state.

Neighbor 10.0.0.3 is in 2WAY state.

A
Neighbor 10.0.0.3 is not forming a full adjacency because it is a DROTHER.
Why wrong: DROTHERs remain in 2WAY state and do not need to become FULL; this is normal.
B
Neighbor 10.0.0.2 is the Backup Designated Router.
Why wrong: The state shows FULL/DR, meaning it is the Designated Router.
C
Both neighbors are in the FULL state.
Why wrong: Neighbor 10.0.0.3 is in 2WAY state.
D
The OSPF adjacencies are functioning normally.
The states are appropriate for the network type; FULL for DR and 2WAY for DROTHER.

Question 15hardmultiple choice

A network engineer runs the following command on Router R1:

R1# show route-map VRF_RED_MAP

route-map VRF_RED_MAP, permit, sequence 10 Match clauses:

ip address prefix-list RED_PREFIXES

Set clauses: tag 100 Policy routing matches: 0 packets, 0 bytes

Based on this output, what is the problem?

Trap 1: The prefix-list RED_PREFIXES is empty.

The route-map may still match even if the prefix-list is empty, but the 0 packets could be due to no traffic; however, the most common cause is that the route-map is not applied.

Trap 2: The set clause is incorrect.

The set clause is valid.

Trap 3: The route-map sequence is invalid.

Sequence 10 is valid.

A
The route-map is not applied to any interface.
The 0 packets matched suggests the route-map is not being used, likely because it is not applied.
B
The prefix-list RED_PREFIXES is empty.
Why wrong: The route-map may still match even if the prefix-list is empty, but the 0 packets could be due to no traffic; however, the most common cause is that the route-map is not applied.
C
The set clause is incorrect.
Why wrong: The set clause is valid.
D
The route-map sequence is invalid.
Why wrong: Sequence 10 is valid.

Study the full IPv6 explanation →

Question 16mediummultiple choice

A network engineer runs the following command on Router R1:

R1# show ip vrf detail RED

VRF RED (VRF Id = 1); default RD <not set>

Interfaces:

GigabitEthernet0/2 Loopback1 Address family IPV4 (Table ID = 1):

No Export VPN route-target communities
      No Import VPN route-target communities
      No import route-map
      No export route-map

VRF label distribution protocol: not configured Address family IPV6 (Table ID = 0x1E000001):

No Export VPN route-target communities
      No Import VPN route-target communities
      No import route-map
      No export route-map

VRF label distribution protocol: not configured

Based on this output, which statement is correct?

Trap 1: The VRF RED has a Route Distinguisher configured.

The output shows 'default RD <not set>'.

Trap 2: The VRF RED has an export route-map configured.

The output shows 'No export route-map'.

Trap 3: The VRF RED is configured for MPLS label distribution.

The output shows 'VRF label distribution protocol: not configured'.

A
The VRF RED has a Route Distinguisher configured.
Why wrong: The output shows 'default RD <not set>'.
B
The VRF RED includes two interfaces: GigabitEthernet0/2 and Loopback1.
The output lists these two interfaces under VRF RED.
C
The VRF RED has an export route-map configured.
Why wrong: The output shows 'No export route-map'.
D
The VRF RED is configured for MPLS label distribution.
Why wrong: The output shows 'VRF label distribution protocol: not configured'.

Open the full BGP breakdown →

Question 17hardmultiple choice

A network engineer runs the following command on Router R1:

R1# show ip bgp vpnv4 vrf RED neighbors 10.1.1.2 advertised-routes

BGP table version is 5, local router ID is 192.168.0.1 Status codes: s suppressed, d damped, h history, * valid, > best, i - internal, r RIB-failure, S Stale, m multipath, b backup-path, f RT-Filter, x best-external, a additional-path, c RIB-compressed, t secondary path, L long-lived-stale, Origin codes: i - IGP, e - EGP, ? - incomplete

Network Next Hop Metric LocPrf Weight Path *> 192.168.1.0/24 0.0.0.0 0 32768 i *> 192.168.2.0/24 0.0.0.0 0 32768 i

Total number of prefixes 2

Based on this output, what is the problem?

Trap 1: The routes are advertised with next hop 0.0.0.0, which will cause…

Next hop 0.0.0.0 is valid for locally originated routes in BGP.

Trap 2: The BGP table version is 5, indicating a problem.

Table version 5 is normal.

Trap 3: The routes have weight 0, which is incorrect.

Weight 32768 is the default for locally originated routes.

A
The routes are advertised with next hop 0.0.0.0, which will cause the neighbor to drop them.
Why wrong: Next hop 0.0.0.0 is valid for locally originated routes in BGP.
B
The routes are being advertised correctly.
The output shows two routes being advertised with valid attributes.
C
The BGP table version is 5, indicating a problem.
Why wrong: Table version 5 is normal.
D
The routes have weight 0, which is incorrect.
Why wrong: Weight 32768 is the default for locally originated routes.

Question 18easymultiple choice

A network engineer runs the following command on Router R1:

R1# show ip route vrf RED 192.168.1.0

Routing entry for 192.168.1.0/24 Known via "connected", distance 0, metric 0 (connected, via interface) Routing Descriptor Blocks: * directly connected, via GigabitEthernet0/2 Route metric is 0, traffic share count is 1

Based on this output, which statement is correct?

Trap 1: The route is learned via OSPF.

It is known via 'connected'.

Trap 2: The route is a static route.

It is a connected route.

Trap 3: The route has a metric of 1.

The metric is 0.

A
The route is learned via OSPF.
Why wrong: It is known via 'connected'.
B
The route is a static route.
Why wrong: It is a connected route.
C
The route is directly connected via GigabitEthernet0/2.
The output states it is directly connected via GigabitEthernet0/2.
D
The route has a metric of 1.
Why wrong: The metric is 0.

Question 19mediummultiple choice

Given the following partial configuration on router R1: ```

interface GigabitEthernet0/0
 ip vrf forwarding CUSTOMER_A
 ip address 192.168.1.1 255.255.255.0

``` What is the effect of this configuration?

Trap 1: The interface is placed into VRF CUSTOMER_A, but the IP address is…

Incorrect. The order shown (VRF first, then IP) is the correct order to avoid IP address removal.

Trap 2: The VRF name is misspelled; it should be 'vrf forwarding…

Incorrect. The command syntax is correct: 'ip vrf forwarding <name>'.

Trap 3: The configuration will fail because VRF CUSTOMER_A must be created…

Incorrect. The VRF must be defined globally with 'ip vrf CUSTOMER_A' before it can be used on an interface. The configuration shown assumes it exists; if not, the command will be rejected.

A
The interface is placed into VRF CUSTOMER_A, and the IP address is assigned correctly.
This is correct. The VRF association is applied before the IP address, so the IP address is associated with the VRF.
B
The interface is placed into VRF CUSTOMER_A, but the IP address is ignored because it must be configured before the VRF command.
Why wrong: Incorrect. The order shown (VRF first, then IP) is the correct order to avoid IP address removal.
C
The VRF name is misspelled; it should be 'vrf forwarding CUSTOMER_A' under the interface.
Why wrong: Incorrect. The command syntax is correct: 'ip vrf forwarding <name>'.
D
The configuration will fail because VRF CUSTOMER_A must be created globally first.
Why wrong: Incorrect. The VRF must be defined globally with 'ip vrf CUSTOMER_A' before it can be used on an interface. The configuration shown assumes it exists; if not, the command will be rejected.

Question 20mediummultiple choice

Consider this partial configuration: ```

ip vrf CUSTOMER_B

rd 65000:1 route-target export 65000:1 route-target import 65000:1 ``` What statement is true about this VRF configuration?

Trap 1: The VRF will not function because route-targets are mandatory for…

Incorrect. Route-targets are optional in VRF-Lite; they are used for route leaking but not required for basic operation.

Trap 2: The RD must match the route-target value exactly.

Incorrect. There is no requirement for the RD to match the route-target; they are independent.

Trap 3: The VRF will only work if 'vrf forwarding' is applied to an…

Incorrect. While the VRF is defined, it becomes active only when applied to an interface, but the configuration itself is valid.

A
The VRF will not function because route-targets are mandatory for VRF-Lite.
Why wrong: Incorrect. Route-targets are optional in VRF-Lite; they are used for route leaking but not required for basic operation.
B
The VRF is correctly configured for VRF-Lite with a unique RD and optional route-targets.
This is correct. The RD is required, and route-targets are optional but often configured for consistency.
C
The RD must match the route-target value exactly.
Why wrong: Incorrect. There is no requirement for the RD to match the route-target; they are independent.
D
The VRF will only work if 'vrf forwarding' is applied to an interface.
Why wrong: Incorrect. While the VRF is defined, it becomes active only when applied to an interface, but the configuration itself is valid.