When a routing protocol introduces other routing protocols, in order to only introduce a part of the routing information that meets the conditions and set certain attributes for the imported routing…

Question

Options

• ATRUE
• BFALSE

• A
  22% (12)
• B
  78% (43)

Explanation

Option B (FALSE) is correct because route-policy is not the only tool available when importing routing information with conditions. Other mechanisms - such as filter-policy (used with ACLs or prefix lists) - can also be applied during route redistribution to selectively import routes that meet specific criteria.

The distractor (A - TRUE) is wrong because it incorrectly implies route-policy has a monopoly on this function. While route-policy is the most versatile option (it can both filter routes AND modify their attributes simultaneously), filter-policy combined with an ACL or ip-prefix list is a valid alternative for purely filtering which routes get imported, without needing the full power of a route-policy.

The key distinction is scope: route-policy supports complex if-match / apply logic for both filtering and attribute manipulation, whereas filter-policy is simpler and handles only permit/deny filtering - but both are legitimate tools for the job.

Memory tip: Think "route-policy is the Swiss Army knife, but it's not the only knife in the drawer." Whenever you see an absolute word like only, treat it as a red flag - routing and networking rarely have just one solution.

No community discussion yet for this question.