With Internal BGP, there is a requirement for all peers to be logically fully meshed, where all IBGP routers must peer with all other IBGP routers. For scaling purposes, there are two mechanisms that were developed to bypass this requirement. What are they? (Choose two.)
With Internal BGP (IBGP), all routers must be fully meshed to exchange routing information. To scale this efficiently, two mechanisms can be used: Confederations and Route Reflectors. Confederations allow a large IBGP domain to be divided into multiple smaller sub-autonomous systems (AS), reducing the number of peers within each sub-AS and enhancing scalability. Route Reflectors enable routers to form a partial mesh instead of a full mesh by designating central routers that other routers can peer with, thereby reducing the number of direct peerings required.
Confederations: Confederations are used to break a large iBGP domain into multiple smaller sub-autonomous systems (ASs), each with its own iBGP full mesh. This reduces the number of iBGP peers in each sub-AS and allows for better scaling of the iBGP network. Route Reflectors: Route Reflectors provide an alternative to the full iBGP mesh requirement by allowing iBGP speakers to form a partial mesh instead of a full mesh. Route Reflectors serve as a central point for iBGP speakers to exchange routing information, and iBGP speakers only need to peer with the Route Reflector instead of forming a full mesh with all iBGP speakers in the network. This reduces the number of iBGP peers and simplifies the iBGP configuration.
A and D OK
How is A and D ok? what are your reasons?
A & D are correct