Refer to the exhibit. Based on the command output, what is one reason why no routes from
the OSPF neighbor 192.168.0.5 are installed in the IP routing table?
R3#show ip ospf neighbor
Neighbor ID Pri State Deat Time Address
Interface
192.168.0.4 1 FULL/DR 00:01:46 116.16.34.4
Serial1/0.1
192.168.0.5 1 FULL/BDR 00:01:46 116.16.35.5
Serial2/0.1
R3#
R3#show ip route ospf
140.140.0.0/32 is subnetted, 3 subnets
O IA 140.140.1.1 (110/65) via 116.16.34.4, 01:21:23,
Serial1/0.1
O IA 140.140.3.1 (110/65) via 116.16.34.4, 01:21:23,
Serial1/0.1
O IA 140.140.2.1 (110/65) via 116.16.34.4, 01:21:23,
Serial1/0.1
192.168.0.0/32 is subnetted, 2 subnets
O IA 192.168.0.4 (110/65) via 116.16.34.4, 01:21:23,
Serial1/0.1
A.
R3 will only install routes from the neighbor with the lowest priority (Pri). If routes have
the same priority, routes from the neighbor with the lowest IP address are used.
B.
R3 did not receive any LSAs from 192.168.0.5.
C.
Routes from backup designated routers are never installed in the IP routing table.
D.
192.168.0.5 is a redundant link to 192.168.0.4, andload balancing is not enabled.
Explanation:
R3 may not receive any LSAs from neighbor 192.168.0.5 because a distribute-list blocks it.
But notice that the LSAs are not filtered out in the LSDB since all routers in an OSPF area
must be the same (synchronized).