Refer to the exhibits. All the serial links between R1, R2, and R3 have the same bandwidth. Users on the 192.168.1.0/24 network report slow response times while they access resources on network 192.168.3.0/24. When a traceroute is run on the path, it shows that the packet is getting forwarded via R2 to R3 although the link between R1 and R3 is still up.
What must the network administrator do to fix the slowness?
The static route on R1 is currently prioritized over other potential routes due to its lower administrative distance (AD). By removing the static route, R1 will rely on EIGRP to dynamically select the best path to network 192.168.3.0/24. Since all serial links between R1, R2, and R3 have the same bandwidth, EIGRP will likely provide a more efficient route. This will resolve the slowness issue by ensuring that traffic takes the most optimal path, which may be the direct route between R1 and R3 instead of the longer route through R2.
If you add another static route it will not overwrite the other one. so I think we are assuming that all routers are advertising their networks. so the best choice is to remove the static route.
If the network administrator deletes the static route through R2, there will be no route to 192.168.3.0 in the routing table, so I think it is correct to add a static route with R3 as the next hop, is this wrong?
Wrong since you can not add two static routes from the same lookup ip add. As far as route 192.168.4.0 which is not participating in te EIGRP process but the route towards the R2 yes then it means redistribute connected is configured.
I think given answer is correct. But you CAN add 2 static routes to same destination. ip route 50.0.0.0 255.255.255.0 172.16.45.2 ip route 50.0.0.0 255.255.255.0 10.1.1.2 C1#sh ip rout S 50.0.0.0 [1/0] via 172.16.45.2 [1/0] via 10.1.1.2
You are right. If as most people say the correct answer is b - and the static route to 192.168.3 is removed on R1 - then R1 has no route to that network - from the output its not learned from eigrp. However we have to assume the route to network 192.168.3/24 will show up in the routing table via eigrp when the static route is removed. Also no other answer fully satisfies the solution. If answer A read - add a floating static route to r3 i would be inclined to go for that - but it doesn't !
Only think with configuring 2 statics is you dont know which route it will take and it would still leave users complaining.
B is correct
A - incorrect - adding another static route pointing to R3 would cause load balancing - packets alternating between the faster and the slower path - would not fix the slowness issue B - correct - EIGRP is configured and we can assume that routes are being advertised (i.e., network 192.168.2.0/24 was learnt via EIGRP), so the route should be installed via EIGRP C - incorrect - static route has lower AD than 5 D - incorrect - external EIGRP has AD of 170, static route still preferred
THE ANSWER CORERCT IS B, BECAUSE, HAVE STATIC ROUTE WITH AD "1 lower than Eeigrp "90"
The given answer is correct, the static route is on the serial interface, also the ad is 1, that why the traffic chose that link to get to the R3, remove the static route will then the R1 will change the routing table and fix the slow link issue
YES THE b ANSWER IS CORRECT
B is correct. easy...
The given answer is correct
Given answer is correct. After deleting static route, eigrp learned route will be added to routing table
How do you know that the connected routes are redistributed in EIGRP. Neither you know if 192.168.3.0/24 is participating in EIGRP. For me it's remove static route via R2 and add a new static that points to R3. Alternatively, information about EIGRP on R3 should be provided