Customer A is complaining that routes advertised from the CE2 router are not being received on
the CE1 router. The physical topology of the network is CE1-PE1-PE2-CE2. The CE1-PE1 subnet
is 172.16.1.0/24. The CE2-PE2 subnet is 172.16.2.0/24. PE1’s loopback is 192.168.3.1 and PE2’s
loopback is 192.168.4.1.Referring to the output in the exhibit, what is the problem?
![PrepAway - Latest Free Exam Questions & Answers](https://www.briefmenow.org/img/pa5.jpg)
A.
No LSP exists between PE1 and PE2.
B.
Route targets are not properly configured.
C.
as-override is not configured in the VRFs.
D.
family inet-vpn is not configured on the PEs.
Explanation:
Why not answer D?
0
0
should be D
0
0
Could be both, either B or D, for both cases the outputs are the same.
0
0
if “family inet-vpn is not configured on the PEs” the first output should not show anything and is showing that is exporting inet-vpn routes, so this option is wrong.
1
0
I agree. PE1 PE2 has negotiated inet-vpn unicast family on BGP setup and hence PE2 is sending routes in the output above. D is not the answer.
0
0
I guess that isn’t D because we have 2 destination in customer-vpn.inet.0, so family inet-vpn is configured.
0
0
One LSP exists – table inet.3, A is wrong
AS override – this question isn’t about AS override – B is wrong
Family inet-vpn was configured, D is wrong
1
0