Question 356 of 2,152
Device Access ControlmediumMultiple ChoiceObjective-mapped

OSPF Neighbor 2WAY State Interpretation

This 300-410 practice question tests your understanding of device access control. The scenario asks you to isolate a root cause — eliminate options that address a different problem before choosing. A key principle to apply: oSPF neighbor states. Once you have made your selection, read the full explanation to reinforce the concept and understand why each distractor is designed to mislead on exam day.

A network engineer runs the following command on Router R1:

R1# show ip ospf neighbor

Neighbor ID     Pri   State           Dead Time   Address         Interface
192.168.1.2     1     FULL/DR        00:00:35    10.1.1.2        GigabitEthernet0/0
192.168.2.2     1     2WAY/DROTHER   00:00:32    10.2.2.2        GigabitEthernet0/1
192.168.3.2     1     FULL/BDR       00:00:38    10.3.3.2        GigabitEthernet0/2

Based on this output, what is a potential issue?

Quick Answer

The answer is the neighbor on GigabitEthernet0/1 stuck in the 2WAY/DROTHER state, which is the only adjacency not reaching FULL. In OSPF, the 2WAY state is a normal and stable condition for DROTHER routers on a broadcast multi-access network, indicating that two-way communication is established but the router is neither the Designated Router (DR) nor the Backup Designated Router (BDR). Because only DR and BDR routers form FULL adjacencies with all neighbors, DROTHER routers remain in 2WAY with each other, meaning they do not exchange Link State Advertisements directly. On the Cisco CCNP ENARSI 300-410 exam, this scenario tests your understanding of OSPF network types and neighbor state progression; a common trap is assuming 2WAY is always an error, when it is actually expected on multi-access segments unless the link is point-to-point. Remember the memory tip: “DR and BDR go FULL, DROTHERs stay 2WAY.”

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

All neighbors are in FULL state, indicating no issues.

The output shows normal OSPF neighbor states on a broadcast multi-access network. The neighbor on Gi0/1 is in the 2WAY/DROTHER state, which is expected for non-DR/BDR routers. The neighbors on Gi0/0 and Gi0/2 are in FULL state (DR and BDR respectively). All states are valid, so there is no issue.

Key principle: OSPF neighbor states

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 neighbor on Gi0/1 is not forming a full adjacency because it is in 2WAY state.

    Why it's wrong here

    Incorrect. The 2WAY state is normal for DROTHER routers on a broadcast multi-access network; it is not an issue.

  • The neighbor on Gi0/0 is the DR, which is causing high CPU usage.

    Why it's wrong here

    Incorrect. The neighbor on Gi0/0 being the DR is normal and not necessarily a cause of high CPU usage.

  • The neighbor on Gi0/2 is the BDR, which is a problem because it should be the DR.

    Why it's wrong here

    Incorrect. The neighbor on Gi0/2 being the BDR is normal; there is no requirement that it should be the DR.

  • All neighbors are in FULL state, indicating no issues.

    Why this is correct

    Correct. All neighbor states are appropriate for their roles, so there is no issue.

    Related concept

    OSPF neighbor states

Common exam traps

Common exam trap: answer the scenario, not the keyword

Candidates often incorrectly assume that any state other than FULL indicates a problem. However, in OSPF broadcast multi-access networks, the 2WAY state between DROTHER routers is normal and does not indicate an issue.

Detailed technical explanation

How to think about this question

In OSPF broadcast multi-access networks, only the DR and BDR form FULL adjacencies with all other routers on the segment; DROTHER routers only exchange LSAs with the DR and BDR, resulting in a 2WAY state between DROTHER routers. This behavior is defined in RFC 2328, Section 9.3, and is designed to reduce the number of adjacencies and LSA flooding overhead. A common real-world scenario is when an engineer misconfigures an interface as broadcast on a point-to-point link, causing unexpected 2WAY states and incomplete routing information exchange.

KKey Concepts to Remember

  • OSPF neighbor states

TExam Day Tips

  • Watch for words such as best, first, most likely and least administrative effort.
  • Review why wrong options are wrong, not only why the correct option is correct.

Key takeaway

OSPF neighbor states

Real-world example

How this comes up in practice

A network engineer at a university connects two campus buildings via a fibre link. Both routers run OSPF, but no adjacency forms — even though both routers can ping each other. The engineer finds one router is in area 0 and the other in area 1. OSPF adjacency requires matching area numbers, hello/dead timers, and network type. IP reachability alone is not enough.

Visual reference

R1 R2 R3 R4 10 100 10 100 OSPF picks R1→R2→R4 (cost 20) over R1→R3→R4 (cost 200)

Quick reference

Routing Protocol Comparison

ProtocolMetricMax HopsAlgorithmType
RIP v2Hop count15Bellman-FordDistance vector
OSPFCost (bandwidth)UnlimitedDijkstra (SPF)Link state
EIGRPComposite metricUnlimitedDUALHybrid
IS-ISCostUnlimitedDijkstraLink state
BGPPolicy / attributesUnlimitedPath vectorPath vector

RIP's 15-hop limit makes it unsuitable for large networks. OSPF and EIGRP dominate modern enterprise deployments.

What to study next

Got this wrong? Here's your next step.

Review oSPF neighbor states, then practise related 300-410 questions on the same topic to reinforce the concept.

Related practice questions

Related 300-410 practice-question pages

Use these pages to review the topic behind this question. This is how one missed question becomes focused revision.

Practice this exam

Start a free 300-410 practice session

Short sessions build daily habit. Longer sessions build exam-day stamina. Try a timed session to simulate real conditions.

FAQ

Questions learners often ask

What does this 300-410 question test?

Device Access Control — This question tests Device Access Control — OSPF neighbor states.

What is the correct answer to this question?

The correct answer is: All neighbors are in FULL state, indicating no issues. — The output shows normal OSPF neighbor states on a broadcast multi-access network. The neighbor on Gi0/1 is in the 2WAY/DROTHER state, which is expected for non-DR/BDR routers. The neighbors on Gi0/0 and Gi0/2 are in FULL state (DR and BDR respectively). All states are valid, so there is no issue.

What should I do if I get this 300-410 question wrong?

Review oSPF neighbor states, then practise related 300-410 questions on the same topic to reinforce the concept.

What is the key concept behind this question?

OSPF neighbor states

About these practice questions

Courseiva creates original exam-style practice questions with explanations and wrong-answer analysis. It does not publish real exam questions, exam dumps, or protected exam content. Learn why practice questions differ from exam dumps →

How Courseiva writes practice questions · Editorial policy

Keep practising

More 300-410 practice questions

Last reviewed: Jun 24, 2026

Question Discussion

Share a tip, memory trick, or ask about the reasoning behind this question. Do not post real exam questions, leaked content, braindumps, or copyrighted exam material. Comments are moderated and may be removed without notice.

Loading comments…

Sign in to join the discussion.

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.