Juniper JN0-364 Exam With Confidence Using Practice Dumps

In Juniper Networks Junos OS, a "hidden" route in the BGP table typically signifies that the router has received the prefix but cannot install it into the active routing table because theBGP next hop is unreachable. This is a common occurrence in service provider environments when transitioning betweenExternal BGP (EBGP)andInternal BGP (IBGP).

According to Juniper technical documentation, when an EBGP speaker (R1) advertises a prefix to its peer (R2), it sets the next hop to its own interface IP address ($172.16.10.1$). By default, when R2 re-advertises that prefix to its IBGP peer (R3), itpreserves the original EBGP next-hop address. Unless R3 has a specific route in its Interior Gateway Protocol (IGP) or a static route to reach the $172.16.10.1$ subnet, it will mark the route as unusable (hidden).

In the exhibit, the show route output onR3explicitly shows the nexthop for $203.0.113.0/24$ as $172.16.10.1$. Since this route is marked "hidden," we can conclude R3 does not know how to reach R2's external peering link. To resolve this, the network administrator must modify the next-hop attribute before the route is sent to R3.

By adding the statementset policy-options policy-statement export-to-ibgp then next-hop self(Option B) on routerR2, R2 will replace the external next-hop ($172.16.10.1$) with its own internal peering address ($172.16.20.1$) before advertising the route to R3. Because R3 already has a direct or IGP connection to R2's internal address, it will successfully resolve the next hop, and the route will transition from "hidden" to "active."

Option A is unnecessary because the route is already being exported; Option C is redundant as the policy is already applied to the IBGP group; and Option D changes path preference but does not solve the underlying reachability problem.

In the BGP Finite State Machine (FSM), theIdlestate is the first stage of any BGP connection. When a BGP session is "stuck" in Idle, it typically indicates that the router is unable to even begin the process of establishing a TCP connection with its neighbor. According to Juniper Networks documentation, before BGP can transition to theConnectorActivestates, it must have a valid route to the neighbor's IP address in the routing table and be able to initiate a three-way TCP handshake on port 179.

If thepeer IP address is incorrect(Option D), the router may not have a route to that destination, or it may be attempting to connect to a non-existent or unreachable host. In many Junos configurations, if the underlying IGP (OSPF/IS-IS) or static routing cannot provide reachability to the neighbor address defined in the BGP configuration, the BGP process will remain in the Idle state and periodically retry the connection.

Regarding the other options:

The local AS number is missing (Option C):In Junos, you cannot commit a BGP configuration if the local autonomous system is not defined at either the [edit routing-options] level or within the BGP group itself. The commit check would fail before the session could even attempt to start.

The BGP group type (Option B):Having a mismatch in group type (internal vs. external) usually results in the session reaching theOpenSentorOpenConfirmstate before failing due to an "unacceptable AS" error in the OPEN message.

BGP hold time (Option A):Issues with hold timers or keepalives generally cause a session that is already in theEstablishedstate to drop; they do not prevent the session from leaving the Idle state.

In OSPF, loop prevention within a single area is achieved through the fundamental nature of its link-state architecture. Unlike distance-vector protocols that rely on "routing by rumor," OSPF ensures that every router within an area maintains an identicalLink-State Database (LSDB). This database acts as a complete map of the network topology.

Once the LSDB is synchronized, each router independently executes theShortest Path First (SPF) algorithm, which is formally known as theDijkstra algorithm. This mathematical process treats the local router as the "root" of a tree and calculates the shortest path to every other node (router) and prefix in the area based on the cumulative interface costs. Because every router uses the same synchronized map (the LSDB) and the same deterministic algorithm, they all arrive at a consistent, loop-free view of the best paths.

According to Juniper Networks technical documentation, the Dijkstra algorithm is superior to theBellman-Ford algorithm(used by distance-vector protocols like RIP) in this regard. Bellman-Ford is susceptible to "count-to-infinity" problems and loops because routers only know the distance and direction to a destination provided by their neighbors, rather than the full topology. In OSPF, even if a link fails, the updated Link-State Advertisement (LSA) is flooded rapidly, and the Dijkstra algorithm is re-run to find a new loop-free path.Routing policies(Option B) are used to manipulate path selection or filter routes but are not the primary mechanism for fundamental loop prevention in OSPF. Similarly,forwarding policies(Option D) govern how traffic is handled at the data plane level rather than determining the control plane's loop-free topology.