Sign Up
Log In
Home
discussion
Exam 300-510 Question id=5177 Routing Policy and Manipulation

Refer to the exhibit.
RP/0/0/CPU0:XR3#show bgp 10.11.11.0 Thu Jun 20:06:24:45.649 UTC BGP routing table entry for 10.11.11.0/24 Versions: Process bRIB/RIB SendTblVer Speaker 9 9 Paths: (2 available, best #2) Advertised to update-groups (with more than one peer): 0.1 Path #1: Received by speaker 0 Not advertised to any peer 1 10.0.0.9 from 10.0.0.9 (192.168.0.1) Origin IGP, metric 0, localpref 100, valid, external Received Path ID 0, Local Path ID 0, version 0 Origin-AS validity: not-found Path #2: Received by speaker 0 Advertised to update-groups (with more than one peer): 0.1 1 10.0.0.13 from 10.0.0.13 (192.168.0.2) Origin IGP, metric 0, localpref 100, weight 651, valid, external, best, group-best Received Path ID 0, Local Path ID 0, version 9
A network operator is getting the route for 10.11.11 0/24 from two upstream providers on #XR3. The network operator must configure #XR3 to force the 10.11.11.0/24 prefix to route via next hop of 10.0.0.9 as primary when available. Which of these can the operator use the routing policy language for, to enforce this traffic forwarding path?

A. weight of 0 on the prefix coming from 192.168.0.2
B. lower local preference on the prefix coming from 192.168.0.2
C. higher local preference on the prefix coming from 192.168.0.1
D. weight of 100 on the prefix coming from 192.168.0.1