What are two characteristics of BGP confederations? (Choose two.)

Question

Options

• AAll routers within the BGP confederation must support BGP confederations.
• BThe member AS numbers used within the confederation are visible from outside the
• CAn Intra-Confederation EBGP session behaves like an EBGP session when propagating
• DIntra-Confederation EBGP neighbors must be directly connected or ebgp-multihop must be

• A
  92% (33)
• B
  3% (1)
• C
  6% (2)

Explanation

BGP confederations split a large AS into smaller sub-ASes to reduce IBGP full-mesh requirements. A is correct: every router within the confederation must be confederation-aware, as non-confederation routers would misinterpret the confederation AS_PATH attribute and reject or misprocess routes. D is correct: intra-confederation EBGP sessions between sub-ASes require either direct connectivity or the ebgp-multihop command, just like standard EBGP. B is incorrect: confederation sub-AS numbers are stripped from the AS_PATH before routes are advertised outside the confederation, so they remain invisible externally. C is incorrect: intra-confederation EBGP behaves more like IBGP in several ways - LOCAL_PREF, MED, and NEXT_HOP attributes are preserved across sub-AS boundaries, unlike standard EBGP behavior.

No community discussion yet for this question.