A legacy OSPF network design solution historically included a large number of routers in a single backbone area 0. The network currently has over 300 OSPF routers How is this network redesigned to…

Question

Options

• AImplement route summarization on the routers in backbone area.
• BUse FIGRP routing protocol instead of OSPF.
• CAdjust OSPF timers to smaller values.
• DBreak down area 0 into smaller nobackbone areas.

• A
  7% (2)
• B
  4% (1)
• C
  18% (5)
• D
  71% (20)

Explanation

OSPF scales poorly with a large number of routers in a single area because every router must maintain a full LSDB (Link State Database) and run the SPF algorithm against it. With 300+ routers in area 0, the LSDB becomes massive, SPF calculations are expensive, and any topology change triggers recalculation across all routers. The correct redesign is to break the network into multiple smaller OSPF areas. Non-backbone areas are created and connected to a leaner area 0 backbone via ABRs (Area Border Routers), reducing the LSDB size in each area and containing SPF recalculations. Option A (summarization) helps reduce routing table size but does not reduce LSDB complexity within the area. Option B (switching to EIGRP) is a protocol replacement, not a redesign. Option C (adjusting timers) improves convergence speed but does not address scalability.

No community discussion yet for this question.