Which pairing reflects a correct protocol-and-metric relationship?

The correct answer is C. RIPv2 and number of hops. RIPv2 uses hop count as its sole routing metric, with a maximum of 15 hops (16 is considered unreachable), making C correct. EIGRP uses a composite metric calculated from bandwidth, delay, reliability, load, and MTU - not link cost (A is wrong; link cost is OSPF's metric). OSPF u

Implement an EIGRP Based Solution

Question

Which pairing reflects a correct protocol-and-metric relationship?

Options

AEIGRP and link cost
BOSPF and number of hops and reliability
CRIPv2 and number of hops
DIS-IS and delay and reliability

How the community answered

(21 responses)

C
95% (20)
D
5% (1)

Explanation

RIPv2 uses hop count as its sole routing metric, with a maximum of 15 hops (16 is considered unreachable), making C correct. EIGRP uses a composite metric calculated from bandwidth, delay, reliability, load, and MTU - not link cost (A is wrong; link cost is OSPF's metric). OSPF uses cost, which is derived from interface bandwidth (typically 100 Mbps / interface bandwidth) - not hop count or reliability (B is wrong). IS-IS also uses cost as its metric, similar to OSPF - not delay and reliability (D is wrong).

Topics

#routing metrics#RIPv2#hop count#routing protocols

Community Discussion

No community discussion yet for this question.

Full 200-101 Practice