Question 110 An EIGRP spoke receives no branch summary after adding a passive-interface statement to the only uplink interface. Which technical mechanism best explains the behavior observed in this scenario? DUAL waits for replies before completing an active diffusing computation; missing replies can trigger SIA handling. Passive EIGRP interfaces do not transmit the neighbor discovery traffic needed for a routing adjacency. EIGRP neighborship requires compatible AS or address-family settings on participating interfaces. Split horizon ordinarily prevents re-advertising a route out the interface on which it was learned. ExplanationCorrect Answer B:Passive EIGRP interfaces do not transmit the neighbor discovery traffic needed for a routing adjacency. This explains why the initial condition produces the observed failure. The direct repair is: Remove unintended passive treatment for the transit interface while keeping LAN interfaces passive as planned. Validate through: Restore a stable uplink neighbor and verify the summarized branch route is received. Other Answers A:DUAL waits for replies before completing an active diffusing computation; missing replies can trigger SIA handling. Passive EIGRP interfaces do not transmit the neighbor discovery traffic needed for a routing adjacency. C:EIGRP neighborship requires compatible AS or address-family settings on participating interfaces. Passive EIGRP interfaces do not transmit the neighbor discovery traffic needed for a routing adjacency. D:Split horizon ordinarily prevents re-advertising a route out the interface on which it was learned. Passive EIGRP interfaces do not transmit the neighbor discovery traffic needed for a routing adjacency.
Question 111 An EIGRP spoke receives no branch summary after adding a passive-interface statement to the only uplink interface. After applying the correction, which verification evidence most directly demonstrates that this issue is resolved? Compare RD, FD and computed metrics and show only the eligible path entering the routing table. Use the neighbor and protocol displays to confirm K-value agreement and stable route exchange. Restore a stable uplink neighbor and verify the summarized branch route is received. Show spoke-to-spoke route propagation on the hub after the targeted split-horizon design change. ExplanationCorrect Answer C:Restore a stable uplink neighbor and verify the summarized branch route is received. This checks the affected traffic or control-plane behavior, not merely a generic up/down indicator. The underlying mechanism is: Passive EIGRP interfaces do not transmit the neighbor discovery traffic needed for a routing adjacency. Other Answers A:Compare RD, FD and computed metrics and show only the eligible path entering the routing table. Passive EIGRP interfaces do not transmit the neighbor discovery traffic needed for a routing adjacency. B:Use the neighbor and protocol displays to confirm K-value agreement and stable route exchange. Passive EIGRP interfaces do not transmit the neighbor discovery traffic needed for a routing adjacency. D:Show spoke-to-spoke route propagation on the hub after the targeted split-horizon design change. Passive EIGRP interfaces do not transmit the neighbor discovery traffic needed for a routing adjacency.
Question 112 An EIGRP spoke receives no branch summary after adding a passive-interface statement to the only uplink interface. Which lasting design or operational safeguard best prevents this particular issue from recurring? Document feasibility and variance checks in the multipath deployment standard. Keep metric K-value configuration uniform across each EIGRP domain. Record hub-spoke network type and split-horizon requirements in the overlay baseline. Use explicit transit-interface exception lists for passive-interface default configurations. ExplanationCorrect Answer D:Use explicit transit-interface exception lists for passive-interface default configurations. This addresses the recurring cause: Passive EIGRP interfaces do not transmit the neighbor discovery traffic needed for a routing adjacency. A targeted acceptance check is: Restore a stable uplink neighbor and verify the summarized branch route is received. Other Answers A:Document feasibility and variance checks in the multipath deployment standard. Passive EIGRP interfaces do not transmit the neighbor discovery traffic needed for a routing adjacency. B:Keep metric K-value configuration uniform across each EIGRP domain. Passive EIGRP interfaces do not transmit the neighbor discovery traffic needed for a routing adjacency. C:Record hub-spoke network type and split-horizon requirements in the overlay baseline. Passive EIGRP interfaces do not transmit the neighbor discovery traffic needed for a routing adjacency.
Question 113 An EIGRP router reports a route Stuck in Active after a downstream peer stops replying to queries during congestion. Which corrective action most directly resolves the documented failure without suppressing unrelated safeguards? Find the nonreplying neighbor and solve the reachability or query-scope failure rather than raising all timers blindly. Remove unintended passive treatment for the transit interface while keeping LAN interfaces passive as planned. Review split horizon on the hub multipoint interface and apply the design-appropriate exception only where needed. Check the variance ratio and feasible-successor condition rather than assuming variance bypasses DUAL loop checks. ExplanationCorrect Answer A:Find the nonreplying neighbor and solve the reachability or query-scope failure rather than raising all timers blindly. DUAL waits for replies before completing an active diffusing computation; missing replies can trigger SIA handling. Correlate the active topology entry, outstanding queries, neighbor resets and underlying transport loss. Other Answers B:Remove unintended passive treatment for the transit interface while keeping LAN interfaces passive as planned. DUAL waits for replies before completing an active diffusing computation; missing replies can trigger SIA handling. C:Review split horizon on the hub multipoint interface and apply the design-appropriate exception only where needed. DUAL waits for replies before completing an active diffusing computation; missing replies can trigger SIA handling. D:Check the variance ratio and feasible-successor condition rather than assuming variance bypasses DUAL loop checks. DUAL waits for replies before completing an active diffusing computation; missing replies can trigger SIA handling.
Question 114 An EIGRP router reports a route Stuck in Active after a downstream peer stops replying to queries during congestion. Which technical mechanism best explains the behavior observed in this scenario? Authentication failure causes otherwise correctly addressed EIGRP hello packets to be rejected rather than forming a neighbor. DUAL waits for replies before completing an active diffusing computation; missing replies can trigger SIA handling. Split horizon ordinarily prevents re-advertising a route out the interface on which it was learned. Stub operation bounds query propagation through nontransit spokes and can reduce stuck-in-active exposure. ExplanationCorrect Answer B:DUAL waits for replies before completing an active diffusing computation; missing replies can trigger SIA handling. This explains why the initial condition produces the observed failure. The direct repair is: Find the nonreplying neighbor and solve the reachability or query-scope failure rather than raising all timers blindly. Validate through: Correlate the active topology entry, outstanding queries, neighbor resets and underlying transport loss. Other Answers A:Authentication failure causes otherwise correctly addressed EIGRP hello packets to be rejected rather than forming a neighbor. DUAL waits for replies before completing an active diffusing computation; missing replies can trigger SIA handling. C:Split horizon ordinarily prevents re-advertising a route out the interface on which it was learned. DUAL waits for replies before completing an active diffusing computation; missing replies can trigger SIA handling. D:Stub operation bounds query propagation through nontransit spokes and can reduce stuck-in-active exposure. DUAL waits for replies before completing an active diffusing computation; missing replies can trigger SIA handling.
Question 115 An EIGRP router reports a route Stuck in Active after a downstream peer stops replying to queries during congestion. After applying the correction, which verification evidence most directly demonstrates that this issue is resolved? Confirm IPv6 EIGRP neighbor and route displays show the expected link and prefixes. Compare effective interface bandwidth/delay and resultant route metric before and after correction. Correlate the active topology entry, outstanding queries, neighbor resets and underlying transport loss. Inspect outbound advertisements and downstream topology entries for the affected specific routes. ExplanationCorrect Answer C:Correlate the active topology entry, outstanding queries, neighbor resets and underlying transport loss. This checks the affected traffic or control-plane behavior, not merely a generic up/down indicator. The underlying mechanism is: DUAL waits for replies before completing an active diffusing computation; missing replies can trigger SIA handling. Other Answers A:Confirm IPv6 EIGRP neighbor and route displays show the expected link and prefixes. DUAL waits for replies before completing an active diffusing computation; missing replies can trigger SIA handling. B:Compare effective interface bandwidth/delay and resultant route metric before and after correction. DUAL waits for replies before completing an active diffusing computation; missing replies can trigger SIA handling. D:Inspect outbound advertisements and downstream topology entries for the affected specific routes. DUAL waits for replies before completing an active diffusing computation; missing replies can trigger SIA handling.
Question 116 An EIGRP router reports a route Stuck in Active after a downstream peer stops replying to queries during congestion. Which lasting design or operational safeguard best prevents this particular issue from recurring? Keep metric K-value configuration uniform across each EIGRP domain. Use explicit transit-interface exception lists for passive-interface default configurations. Classify EIGRP sites by transit role and keep stub policies consistent with their advertised routes. Bound query scope with hierarchy or stubs and monitor routing-control plane congestion. ExplanationCorrect Answer D:Bound query scope with hierarchy or stubs and monitor routing-control plane congestion. This addresses the recurring cause: DUAL waits for replies before completing an active diffusing computation; missing replies can trigger SIA handling. A targeted acceptance check is: Correlate the active topology entry, outstanding queries, neighbor resets and underlying transport loss. Other Answers A:Keep metric K-value configuration uniform across each EIGRP domain. DUAL waits for replies before completing an active diffusing computation; missing replies can trigger SIA handling. B:Use explicit transit-interface exception lists for passive-interface default configurations. DUAL waits for replies before completing an active diffusing computation; missing replies can trigger SIA handling. C:Classify EIGRP sites by transit role and keep stub policies consistent with their advertised routes. DUAL waits for replies before completing an active diffusing computation; missing replies can trigger SIA handling.
Question 117 Two EIGRP peers have matching AS numbers but configured K-value sets differ, and a neighbor repeatedly resets. Which corrective action most directly resolves the documented failure without suppressing unrelated safeguards? Align compatible EIGRP metric K-values on both peers after confirming design requirements. Enable the intended IPv6 address-family and its interface activation in the named EIGRP configuration. Synchronize the active authentication keys and key-chain configuration on both peers. Check the variance ratio and feasible-successor condition rather than assuming variance bypasses DUAL loop checks. ExplanationCorrect Answer A:Align compatible EIGRP metric K-values on both peers after confirming design requirements. EIGRP neighbors must agree on metric weighting parameters; incompatible K-values stop a stable adjacency. Use the neighbor and protocol displays to confirm K-value agreement and stable route exchange. Other Answers B:Enable the intended IPv6 address-family and its interface activation in the named EIGRP configuration. EIGRP neighbors must agree on metric weighting parameters; incompatible K-values stop a stable adjacency. C:Synchronize the active authentication keys and key-chain configuration on both peers. EIGRP neighbors must agree on metric weighting parameters; incompatible K-values stop a stable adjacency. D:Check the variance ratio and feasible-successor condition rather than assuming variance bypasses DUAL loop checks. EIGRP neighbors must agree on metric weighting parameters; incompatible K-values stop a stable adjacency.
Question 118 Two EIGRP peers have matching AS numbers but configured K-value sets differ, and a neighbor repeatedly resets. Which technical mechanism best explains the behavior observed in this scenario? A feasible path in the local topology does not guarantee its more-specific prefix is advertised past outbound policy. EIGRP neighbors must agree on metric weighting parameters; incompatible K-values stop a stable adjacency. EIGRP's feasible condition requires the neighbor's reported distance to be strictly less than the current feasible distance. Named EIGRP uses address-family and AF-interface configuration scopes; global IPv4 activation does not imply IPv6 neighborship. ExplanationCorrect Answer B:EIGRP neighbors must agree on metric weighting parameters; incompatible K-values stop a stable adjacency. This explains why the initial condition produces the observed failure. The direct repair is: Align compatible EIGRP metric K-values on both peers after confirming design requirements. Validate through: Use the neighbor and protocol displays to confirm K-value agreement and stable route exchange. Other Answers A:A feasible path in the local topology does not guarantee its more-specific prefix is advertised past outbound policy. EIGRP neighbors must agree on metric weighting parameters; incompatible K-values stop a stable adjacency. C:EIGRP's feasible condition requires the neighbor's reported distance to be strictly less than the current feasible distance. EIGRP neighbors must agree on metric weighting parameters; incompatible K-values stop a stable adjacency. D:Named EIGRP uses address-family and AF-interface configuration scopes; global IPv4 activation does not imply IPv6 neighborship. EIGRP neighbors must agree on metric weighting parameters; incompatible K-values stop a stable adjacency.
Question 119 Two EIGRP peers have matching AS numbers but configured K-value sets differ, and a neighbor repeatedly resets. After applying the correction, which verification evidence most directly demonstrates that this issue is resolved? Verify stub neighbor status and that query propagation no longer crosses the leaf sites during a controlled failover. Correlate the active topology entry, outstanding queries, neighbor resets and underlying transport loss. Use the neighbor and protocol displays to confirm K-value agreement and stable route exchange. Confirm IPv6 EIGRP neighbor and route displays show the expected link and prefixes. ExplanationCorrect Answer C:Use the neighbor and protocol displays to confirm K-value agreement and stable route exchange. This checks the affected traffic or control-plane behavior, not merely a generic up/down indicator. The underlying mechanism is: EIGRP neighbors must agree on metric weighting parameters; incompatible K-values stop a stable adjacency. Other Answers A:Verify stub neighbor status and that query propagation no longer crosses the leaf sites during a controlled failover. EIGRP neighbors must agree on metric weighting parameters; incompatible K-values stop a stable adjacency. B:Correlate the active topology entry, outstanding queries, neighbor resets and underlying transport loss. EIGRP neighbors must agree on metric weighting parameters; incompatible K-values stop a stable adjacency. D:Confirm IPv6 EIGRP neighbor and route displays show the expected link and prefixes. EIGRP neighbors must agree on metric weighting parameters; incompatible K-values stop a stable adjacency.
Question 120 Two EIGRP peers have matching AS numbers but configured K-value sets differ, and a neighbor repeatedly resets. Which lasting design or operational safeguard best prevents this particular issue from recurring? Match all EIGRP AFs and VRF bindings to documented tenant routing boundaries. Classify EIGRP sites by transit role and keep stub policies consistent with their advertised routes. Manage shared routing authentication secrets and rollover lifetimes as one coordinated change. Keep metric K-value configuration uniform across each EIGRP domain. ExplanationCorrect Answer D:Keep metric K-value configuration uniform across each EIGRP domain. This addresses the recurring cause: EIGRP neighbors must agree on metric weighting parameters; incompatible K-values stop a stable adjacency. A targeted acceptance check is: Use the neighbor and protocol displays to confirm K-value agreement and stable route exchange. Other Answers A:Match all EIGRP AFs and VRF bindings to documented tenant routing boundaries. EIGRP neighbors must agree on metric weighting parameters; incompatible K-values stop a stable adjacency. B:Classify EIGRP sites by transit role and keep stub policies consistent with their advertised routes. EIGRP neighbors must agree on metric weighting parameters; incompatible K-values stop a stable adjacency. C:Manage shared routing authentication secrets and rollover lifetimes as one coordinated change. EIGRP neighbors must agree on metric weighting parameters; incompatible K-values stop a stable adjacency.
