A medium-sized company has a Class C IP address. It has two Cisco routers and one non-Cisco
router. All three routers are using RIP version 1. The company network is using the block of
198.133.219.0/24. The company has decided it would be a good idea to split the network into
three smaller subnets and create the option of conserving addresses with VLSM. What is the best
course of action if the company wants to have 40 hosts in each of the three subnets?
A.
Convert all the routers to EIGRP and use 198.133.219.32/27, 198.133.219.64/27, and
198.133.219.92/27 as the new subnetworks.
B.
Maintain the use of RIP version 1 and use 198.133.219.32/27, 198.133.219.64/27, and
198.133.219.92/27 as the new subnetworks.
C.
Convert all the routers to EIGRP and use 198.133.219.64/26, 198.133.219.128/26, and
198.133.219.192/26 as the new subnetworks.
D.
Convert all the routers to RIP version 2 and use 198.133.219.64/26, 198.133.219.128/26, and
198.133.219.192/26 as the new subnetworks.
E.
Convert all the routers to OSPF and use 198.133.219.16/28, 198.133.219.32/28, and
198.133.219.48/28 as the new subnetworks.
F.
Convert all the routers to static routes and use 198.133.219.16/28, 198.133.219.32/28, and
198.133.219.48/28 as the new subnetworks.
Explanation:
This company implemented the routing protocol RIP version 1 at the start, but RIP version2 is the
best choice for it due to small-scale, first, it needs less configuration when modifying, which will
least affect the network; second, RIP version2 supports classless routing, fully satisfying the
requirements.