Refer to the exhibit. Which effect of this configuration is true?

Question

Exhibit

Options

• AIt configures VPWS multihomed.
• BIt configures VPWS single homed.
• CIt configures an IPv4 peering with 192.168.1.1
• DIt configures MPLS traffic engineering.

• A
  6% (2)
• B
  88% (30)
• C
  3% (1)
• D
  3% (1)

Explanation

VPWS Single-Homed Configuration

Option B is correct because the configuration shown establishes a basic point-to-point pseudowire (VPWS) with a single attachment circuit connecting to one PE router - the hallmark of single-homed operation. A single-homed VPWS lacks the redundancy mechanisms (such as an Ethernet Segment Identifier or ESI, and EVPN multi-homing route types) that would indicate multihomed operation, ruling out A. Option C is incorrect because while BGP peering may be present, VPWS configurations use BGP for pseudowire signaling/label exchange - not to establish a simple IPv4 routing peer relationship. Option D is wrong because MPLS-TE requires explicit tunnel configuration with RSVP-TE or similar, which is a separate feature from VPWS L2VPN services.

Memory tip: Think "single-homed = single path, no ESI." If you see an ESI value or redundancy group in the config, it's multihomed. No ESI = single-homed VPWS.

No community discussion yet for this question.