Home > Archive > CCNP > June 2003 > Totally stubby ?





You are viewing an archived Text-only version of the thread. To view this thread in it's original format and/or if you want to reply to this thread please [click here]

Author Totally stubby ?
Townsend

2003-06-18, 7:13 am

You are configuring a totally stubby area in OSPF. What configuration must the ABR have that are not required on the Internal area routers?
A. A virtual link to area 0
B. OSPF summarization command
C. default-cost extension to the area command
D. no-summary extension to the area stub command


I believe the answer should be "D". Others say "A", however, it seems to me that a virtual link would only be necessary if the ABR was not connected to area 0. Which is not mentioned in this question. Please tell me what you think.
Thanks.
darthfeces

2003-06-18, 10:30 am

stub no-summary

why a virtual link ?
this is considered bad design and should
only be used as a temporary solution.
jane55

2003-06-19, 5:25 pm

Virtual link is use to join 2 networks e.g., if a company purchase another company that has an area 0, (can’t have 2 area 0 on the same network), but you could use a virtual link to connect them?
Stub makes your routing table and database smaller so use no-summary on your ABR to keep your stub/totally stub free of unnecessary routes. Stub doesn’t accept routes from external routers and totally stub doesn’t accept ABR/external routes so you would configure your ABR with no–summary.
jgreenie

2003-06-19, 6:12 pm

Others say "A" ????? I was just wondering---who are those "others"??? Virtual link makes no sense; it has nothing to do with stubby areas---at least "B" sounds like it may have something to do with it----of course "A" is correct.
Townsend

2003-06-20, 3:32 pm

Thanks everyone! It looks like most everyone agrees it should be D.
Sponsored Links





Free Braindumps | MCSE braindumps software forum

Copyright 2003 - 2009 examnotes.net