mediumMultiple Choice
350-401 Practice Question: Runs the following command on Router R1: R1# show…
A network engineer runs the following command on Router R1:
R1# show ip eigrp interfaces detail
EIGRP-IPv4 Interfaces for AS(100)
Interface: GigabitEthernet0/0
Mtu: 1500, Bandwidth: 1000000 Kbit, Delay: 100 microseconds Reliability: 255/255, Load: 1/255, Min MTU: 1500 Hello interval: 5 sec, Hold time: 15 sec Next hello in: 3 secs Passive interface: No Split horizon: Enabled Authentication: None
Neighbor count: 1 Interface: GigabitEthernet0/1
Mtu: 1500, Bandwidth: 100000 Kbit, Delay: 1000 microseconds Reliability: 255/255, Load: 1/255, Min MTU: 1500 Hello interval: 5 sec, Hold time: 15 sec Next hello in: 1 secs Passive interface: No Split horizon: Enabled Authentication: None
Neighbor count: 1
Based on this output, what can be concluded?
⚠ Common exam trap
Cisco often tests the misconception that the 'show ip eigrp interfaces detail' command displays the K values or metric weights, when in fact it only shows per-interface parameters like bandwidth and delay, and the K values must be verified separately with 'show ip protocols'.
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
✓
GigabitEthernet0/1 will have a higher EIGRP metric than GigabitEthernet0/0 for the same prefix.
EIGRP uses the composite metric formula: metric = (K1 * bandwidth + (K2 * bandwidth) / (256 - load) + K3 * delay) * (K5 / (reliability + K4)). With default K values (K1=K3=1, others=0), the metric simplifies to bandwidth + delay. Gi0/0 has bandwidth 1,000,000 Kbit and delay 100 microseconds, while Gi0/1 has bandwidth 100,000 Kbit and delay 1000 microseconds. The lower bandwidth and higher delay on Gi0/1 result in a higher metric for the same prefix.
Answer analysis
Option-by-option breakdown
For each option: why learners choose it and why it is or isn't the right answer here.
- ✗
Both interfaces have the same metric weight for bandwidth and delay.
Why it's wrong here
The show output for these interfaces only reports interface-level attributes such as bandwidth and delay; EIGRP metric weights (k-values) are configured globally under the EIGRP process via the metric weights command and are not interface-specific. Consequently, comparing metric weights for Gi0/0 and Gi0/1 is not possible from this output, and the statement that both interfaces have the same metric weight is an unsupported and incorrect inference.
- ✓
GigabitEthernet0/1 will have a higher EIGRP metric than GigabitEthernet0/0 for the same prefix.
Why this is correct
EIGRP computes its composite metric using the minimum bandwidth along the path and the cumulative delay; lower bandwidth and higher delay both increase the metric value. Since Gi0/1's interface statistics show a less favorable combination of bandwidth and delay compared with Gi0/0, the same prefix learned via Gi0/1 would receive a numerically higher metric. This makes Gi0/1 the less preferred path for that prefix under equal-cost conditions.
- ✗
Interface Gi0/1 is configured as a passive interface.
Why it's wrong here
The command output includes a Passive interface field for each interface, and for Gi0/1 it explicitly states No. A passive interface in EIGRP would stop sending Hello packets and would not establish neighbors, leaving the interface in a passive state; the output would then indicate Yes. Therefore, the assertion that Gi0/1 is passive directly contradicts the displayed interface status and is wrong.
- ✗
EIGRP authentication is enabled on both interfaces.
Why it's wrong here
The output clearly lists Authentication: None for both interfaces, which means no MD5 or HMAC-SHA authentication key is configured for EIGRP on Gi0/0 or Gi0/1. If EIGRP authentication were enabled, the interface output would show the authentication mode (e.g., MD5 or HMAC-SHA-256) and associated key chain. Since the field is None, both interfaces are operating without authentication, making the statement false.
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 350-401 question is part of Courseiva's 1,923-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 350-401 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 350-401 exam.