— Exhibit —
user@router> show route
inet.0: 9 destinations, 9 routes (9 active, 0 holddown, 0 hidden)
+ = Active Route, – = Last Active, * = Both
10.10.10.91/32 *[Direct/0] 00:09:40
>via lo0.0
10.10.10.92/32 *[OSPF/10] 00:01:50, metric 1
>to 172.16.1.2 via ge-0/0/2.0
100.100.1.0/24 *[Static/5] 00:01:50
Reject
172.16.1.0/24 *[Direct/0] 00:06:09
>via ge-0/0/2.0
172.16.1.1/32 *[Local/0] 00:06:09
Local via ge-0/0/2.0
192.168.0.0/16 *[Aggregate/130] 00:00:06
Reject
192.168.0.0/17 *[Aggregate/130] 00:00:06
>to 172.16.1.2 via ge-0/0/2.0
192.168.50.0/24 *[Static/5] 00:00:06
>to 172.16.1.2 via ge-0/0/2.0
192.168.51.0/24 *[Static/5] 00:00:06
>to 172.16.1.2 via ge-0/0/2.0
user@router> show configuration policy-options
policy-statement demo {term 1 {
from {
protocol aggregate;
route-filter 192.168.0.0/16 longer;
}
then accept;
}
}
user@router> show configuration protocols ospf
export demo;
area 0.0.0.0 {
interface ge-0/0/2.0;
}
— Exhibit —
Given the configuration and routing table shown in the exhibit, which routes will be advertised to OSPF
neighbors because of the demo policy?
A.
192.168.0.0/16 only
B.
192.168.0.0/17 only
C.
192.168.0.0/16 and 192.168.0.0/17
D.
192.168.0.0/17, 192.168.50.0/24, and 192.168.51.0/24