regards to change in the path packets take after the migration is complete?

Question

Options

• AThe areas sizes.
• BThe number of prefixes
• CThe redistribution points.
• DThe bandwidth and metrics of the links.

• A
  4% (2)
• B
  6% (3)
• C
  2% (1)
• D
  88% (45)

Explanation

Bandwidth and link metrics are what routing protocols use to calculate cost and select the best path. After a migration (e.g., from RIP to OSPF), the new protocol may evaluate the same topology using entirely different metrics - OSPF uses bandwidth-derived cost, while RIP uses hop count - so the same physical links produce different preferred paths based on their bandwidth and assigned metrics.

Why the distractors are wrong:

• A (Area sizes): OSPF area design affects scalability and LSA flooding scope, not which specific path is chosen for a destination.
• B (Number of prefixes): More or fewer routes in the routing table affects memory and convergence, not the forwarding path for any given prefix.
• C (Redistribution points): Redistribution matters during a hybrid migration phase when two protocols coexist; once migration is complete, redistribution is no longer the deciding factor.

Memory tip: Think "metrics = path math." Whatever numbers the routing protocol crunches to pick a winner - that's what changes the traffic flow. Bandwidth and metrics are the inputs to that math, making D the answer whenever the question is about post-migration path selection.

No community discussion yet for this question.