The network is converged. After link-state advertisements are received from Router_A, what
information will Router_E contain in its routing table for the subnets 208.149.23.64 and
208.149.23.96?
A.
O 208.149.23.64 [110/13] via 190.173.23.10, 00:00:07, FastEthernet 0/0
O 208.149.23.96 [110/13] via 190.173.23.10, 00:00:16, FastEthernet 0/0
B.
O 208.149.23.64 [110/1] via 190.172.23.10, 00:00:07, Serial 1/0
O 208.149.23.96 [110/3] via 190.173.23.10, 00:00:16, FastEthernet 0/0
C.
O 208.149.23.64 [110/13] via 190.172.23.10, 00:00:07, Serial 1/0
O 208.149.23.96 [110/13] via 190.172.23.10, 00:00:16, Serial 1/0
O 208.149.23.96 [110/13] via 190.173.23.10, 00:00:16, FastEthernet 0/0
D.
O 208.149.23.64 [110/3] via 190.172.23.10, 00:00:07, Serial 1/0
O 208.149.23.96 [110/3] via 190.172.23.10, 00:00:16, Serial 1/0
Explanation:
Router_E learns two subnets subnets 208.149.23.64 and 208.149.23.96 via
Router_A through FastEthernet interface. The interface cost is calculated with the formula 108 /
Bandwidth. For FastEthernet it is 108 / 100 Mbps = 108 / 100,000,000 = 1. Therefore the cost is
12(learned from Router_A) + 1= 13for both subnets – B is not correct.
The cost through T1 link is much higher than through T3 link (T1 cost = 108 / 1.544 Mbps = 64; T3
cost = 108 / 45 Mbps = 2) so surely OSPF will choose the path through T3 link -> Router_E will
choose the path from Router_A through FastEthernet0/0, not Serial1/0 – C & D are not correct.
In fact, we can quickly eliminate answers B, C and D because they contain at least one subnet
learned from Serial1/0 – they are surely incorrect.
Should the cost from RA to 208.149.23.64 and .96 network be 13 because its coming out on one of the interface on R_C?
Here are some links to web-sites that we link to simply because we assume they’re really worth visiting.
Check below, are some absolutely unrelated sites to ours, nonetheless, they are most trustworthy sources that we use.
A