Which two statements about implementing a separate MPLS VPN to provide customers Internet access are correct? (Choose two.)

Question

Options

• AThe Internet gateway router will act as a CE router.
• BCustomers will use separate interfaces for VPN and Internet access.
• CCustomers are assigned to the Internet VPN.
• DInternet routes will be leaked from the PE global routing table to the customer VRF.

• A
  82% (51)
• B
  11% (7)
• D
  6% (4)

Explanation

In a separate MPLS VPN design for Internet access, the Internet gateway router connects to the PE router just like any other customer site - meaning it functions as a CE router (A), and customers needing Internet access are simply assigned membership in the Internet VPN (C), receiving Internet routes via that VPN just as they receive private routes via their enterprise VPN.

Why B is wrong: Customers do NOT need separate physical interfaces - the MPLS VPN model allows both private VPN and Internet traffic to traverse the same customer interface, which is precisely the operational advantage of this design.

Why D is wrong: Route leaking from the PE's global routing table into a customer VRF is a different Internet access model (the "global table" approach). In the separate Internet VPN model, Internet routes are distributed as standard VPN routes via MP-BGP from the Internet-gateway CE, not leaked from the global table.

Memory tip: Think of the Internet VPN as just another customer - the gateway is a CE, and customers join it. The phrase "separate VPN" means a dedicated VRF for Internet, not a separate wire or a global-table leak.

No community discussion yet for this question.