In BGP, not only the configuration of peers becomes complicated in a fully connected IBGP network, but also the consumption of network resources and device resources will increase. Which of the…

Question

Options

• ARoute attenuation
• BRoute reflector
• CRoute aggregation
• DGTSM

• A
  4% (1)
• B
  83% (20)
• C
  8% (2)
• D
  4% (1)

Explanation

Route Reflectors (B) solve the IBGP full-mesh problem by allowing a designated router to receive routes from its clients and reflect them to other clients, eliminating the requirement that every IBGP router maintain a direct session with every other router. Without route reflectors, a network with N IBGP routers requires N(N-1)/2 peer sessions, which grows unsustainably as the network scales. Route attenuation (A) is a stability mechanism that suppresses flapping routes by penalizing frequent route changes -- it addresses route instability, not peer session complexity. Route aggregation (C) reduces the number of prefixes advertised by summarizing multiple routes into one, which saves table space and bandwidth but does nothing to reduce the number of IBGP sessions required. GTSM (D) is a security feature that validates BGP packets by checking the IP TTL value, protecting against remote spoofing attacks, and is unrelated to simplifying network topology.

Memory tip: Picture a mirror in the center of your network -- a Route Reflector "reflects" routes outward to all clients, so each spoke only needs to connect to the mirror, not to every other spoke.

No community discussion yet for this question.