MENU
You have been asked to examine a BGP configuration for a co-worker who is having difficulty establishing BGP peering. The address shown is that of the neighbor's Lo0 interface. Given the configuration shown, what would be your recommendation?
S3(config-router-bgp-65042)# neighbor 192.168.32.1
S3(config-router-neighbor)# remote-as 65042
Suggested Answer: C
Get Premium D-NWG-FN-23 Questions
as Interactive Web-Based Practice Test or PDF
Real Exam Format
Detailed Explanations
Instant Access
Get Your Practice Test
40 comments · newest first
YO
Yolando
10 months ago
Isn't the neighbor IP supposed to be in a different AS? Just checking!
KR
Kristeen
11 months ago
No shutdown is a must, but what about the AS number?
RY
Ryan
11 months ago
Wait, why would you use a loopback for this? Sounds off.
TE
Tenesha
11 months ago
Definitely agree, option C seems like the right move!
SU
Sueann
11 months ago
Looks like a classic misconfiguration issue.
KR
Kristin
12 months ago
I’m leaning towards option D because I think the BGP state needs to be ACTIVE before it can establish a connection, but I’m not entirely confident.
CO
Cortney
12 months ago
The update-source command sounds familiar; I feel like it was important for loopback interfaces in BGP setups.
VI
Viva
12 months ago
I think I practiced a question where we had to use the no shutdown command, but I can't recall if that was for BGP specifically or just for interfaces.
KE
Kenneth
1 year ago
I remember something about needing to check the remote AS number; it seems like it should match, but I'm not sure if that's the issue here.
ME
Melda
1 year ago
I'm a bit unsure about this one. The configuration looks a bit odd, with the neighbor address not including the subnet mask. Maybe I should try option A and modify the existing config just to be safe.
CH
Chana
1 year ago
Ah, this is a classic BGP problem. I've seen this before. I'm pretty confident option C is the right answer here - just issue the no shutdown command and verify the BGP state is ESTABLISHED.
GL
Glenn
1 year ago
Hmm, this looks like a tricky BGP configuration issue. I'll need to carefully review the details to make sure I understand the problem before attempting a solution.
KI
Kimi
1 year ago
Okay, let's see here. The configuration shows the neighbor's Lo0 interface, so I'm thinking the update-source command might be the way to go. I'll try option B and see if that resolves the peering issue.
SA
Sanda
1 year ago
This question seems straightforward, I think I can eliminate a few options and narrow it down.
KA
Kathrine
1 year ago
Okay, let me think this through step-by-step. CE2 sends the packet, so it needs to get to PE2 first. Then PE2 should push a label and send it to ASBR2.
RA
Rana
1 year ago
I'm a bit unsure about this one. Would the LMS be a good option to record the session? And a digital camera could be useful to take photos of the speaker, right?
TR
Tran
1 year ago
Hmm, I'm not sure. Live streaming could also work well to share real-time whale sightings and events with customers. That might be more engaging than a blog.
LE
Leah
1 year ago
I'm a bit confused about the `remove_if` function here. Is it supposed to modify the vector in place, or does it create a new one?
WI
Wilbert
1 year ago
Hmm, I'm a bit confused on this one. I know Cisco DNA Center is used for network management, but I'm not familiar with how it handles third-party devices. I'll have to think this through carefully.
TY
Ty
1 year ago
Hmm, I'm torn between C and D. Comfort is crucial, but I think performance might be slightly more important here.
IE
Iesha
2 years ago
Agreed, let's give it a shot and see if the BGP peering is established.
GA
Gaston
2 years ago
Let's try option C first and see if that resolves the issue.
FL
Flo
2 years ago
I'm not sure, but I think option A could also work if properly modified.
IE
Iesha
2 years ago
I would go with option B, adding the update-source command could help.
DE
Destiny
2 years ago
I disagree, option D might be a better choice.
GA
Gaston
2 years ago
I think the correct recommendation would be option C.
TA
Tashia
2 years ago
Let's try option A first and see if that resolves the peering issue
CO
Colene
2 years ago
I'm leaning towards option A as well, to be more specific in the configuration
FL
Florinda
2 years ago
I believe option A is the best choice as it specifies the subnet mask for the neighbor
TA
Taryn
2 years ago
I agree, but I would also consider option B for the loopback interface
LO
Lonny
2 years ago
I think option D might also work
DI
Diego
2 years ago
I would recommend option C
DE
Denae
3 years ago
Definitely. They're trying to see if we can spot the unnecessary step. I'm going with option C - verify the BGP state is ESTABLISHED.
RO
Rolande
3 years ago
Haha, I bet the exam writer threw in the no shutdown command just to trip people up. Classic move!
ED
Edda
3 years ago
Good point. If the configuration is already in place, then the no shutdown command shouldn't be necessary. We should just need to verify the BGP state to make sure it's ESTABLISHED.
GE
Geraldine
2 years ago
That makes sense. We just need to make sure the peering is established.
PA
Pansy
2 years ago
C) Issue the no shutdown command and verify that the BGP state is ESTABLISHED
TE
Tess
3 years ago
But wait, why would we need to issue the no shutdown command? Shouldn't the BGP session be up and running already?
KI
Kina
3 years ago
Yeah, I agree. Updating the source to the loopback interface is a common best practice for BGP peering. That should help stabilize the connection.
JU
Judy
3 years ago
Hmm, this question seems pretty straightforward. The configuration provided shows that the neighbor's IP address is the address of the Lo0 interface, so I'd recommend using the loopback interface for the update source.