Selected Answer: B I think the key points for this question are in: - Routers D and E are directly connected iBGP peers. - Router F is not an iBGP peer of routers D and E. If BGP client-to-client reflection is disabled, routers D and E will still exchange information since they are directly connected. Router F is not, but it is not an iBGP peer to D and E. There is a circle there, but it doesn't say it is the same AS. I think B is the best option here.

Is here any correct answer??? A) Remove the route-reflector configuration on router RR2 - no, we do not have full-mesh B) Disable BGP client-to-client reflection - we do not have full-mesh C) Enable next-hop-self for BGP peering on router D - next-hop is changed only if the route is received from eBGP D) Enable next-hop-self for BGP peering on router C. - next-hop-self command on the route reflector will modify next hop attributes only for routes that are learned from eBGP peers

No DUsoo, I also don't see any correct answer to this.

This document explains router reflectors nicely https://www.ciscolive.com/c/dam/r/ciscolive/emea/docs/2020/pdf/R6BGArNQ/TECRST-1310.pdf#xd_co_f=MDkyZDAyMmUtN2RlMS00ZjIzLTk2ZDMtNzMwN2FkZTMyMzQx~

Selected Answer: D Not the best written question, but the fact that Router C is a gateway to an eBGP peer means it should use next-hop-self for all the iBGP routers, so I pick answer D

Looking closer, 10.10.10.1 is not an eBGP peer, and next-hop-self doesn't apply to reflected routes so Im not sure of an answer here

Selected Answer: D I'm not sure either. D is the "least incorrect" option, but it still seems technically unnecessary.