hardMultiple ChoiceObjective-mapped
300-410 Practice Question: Router R1 is leaking routes from VRF-A to the…
Router R1 is leaking routes from VRF-A to the global table using route-map LEAK. The global table receives the routes, but traffic from the global table to destinations in VRF-A is dropped. R1 configuration: ip vrf VRF-A, rd 100:1, route-target export 100:1, route-target import 100:1. The route-map LEAK is applied to the VRF export. The global table has a default route pointing to null0. 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 leaked routes have a next-hop that is only reachable within VRF-A, not in the global routing table, causing traffic to be dropped.
When routes are leaked from VRF to global, the global table installs them, but the reverse path (global to VRF) requires proper routing. If the global table has a default route pointing to null0, traffic to the leaked prefixes may match the default and be discarded if the leaked routes are less specific. However, the more specific leaked routes should override the default. The issue could be that the leaked routes are not being installed due to administrative distance or that the default route is preferred. But the most common cause is that the route-map does not set the next-hop correctly, or the VRF interface is not reachable from the global table. The root cause is that the leaked routes have a next-hop that is not reachable in the global table, often because the next-hop is in the VRF.
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 leaked routes have a next-hop that is only reachable within VRF-A, not in the global routing table, causing traffic to be dropped.
Why this is correct
Correct: When leaking, the next-hop must be reachable in the destination table; otherwise, packets are dropped.
- ✗
The global table default route is overriding the leaked routes.
Why it's wrong here
Incorrect: Leaked routes are more specific and should override the default.
- ✗
The route-map should be applied to the VRF import instead of export.
Why it's wrong here
Incorrect: Export is correct for leaking from VRF to global.
- ✗
The VRF must have a route to the global table.
Why it's wrong here
Incorrect: The issue is global to VRF, not VRF to global.
Go deeper
Related to this question
About these practice questions
One of 1,966 original 300-410 practice questions on Courseiva, each with a full explanation and wrong-answer analysis — not exam dumps or protected exam content. 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.