Refer to the exhibit. Two Cisco Nexus 9000 Series Switches fail to establish OSPF adjacency. Which configuration resolves the issue?

The correct answer is B. N9K2(config)# interface eth1/2. On N9K2 the IP on Eth1/2 was placed in a /25, which puts 172.18.1.200 in the 172.18.1.128/25 network, whereas N9K1's 172.18.1.1/24 lives in 172.18.1.0/24. Because they aren't in the same subnet they cannot form adjacency. Changing N9K2's mask to /24 (so both ends share…

Network

Question

Exhibits

Options

AN9K2(config)# interface loopback 0
BN9K2(config)# interface eth1/2
CN9K1(config)# router ospf Telco
DN9K1(config)# interface loopback 0

How the community answered

(49 responses)

A
4% (2)
B
76% (37)
C
6% (3)
D
14% (7)

Explanation

On N9K2 the IP on Eth1/2 was placed in a /25, which puts 172.18.1.200 in the 172.18.1.128/25 network, whereas N9K1's 172.18.1.1/24 lives in 172.18.1.0/24. Because they aren't in the same subnet they cannot form adjacency. Changing N9K2's mask to /24 (so both ends share 172.18.1.0/24) restores direct Layer 3 connectivity and allows OSPF to neighbor.

Topics

#OSPF#adjacency#Nexus 9000#interface configuration

Community Discussion

No community discussion yet for this question.

Full 300-615 Practice