Dynamic Disks Are Supported By Windows Vista

By Author: jack jone
Total Articles: 82
Comment this article

8. That you are the administrator of an internetwork that consists of Windows Server 2008 and Windows Vista computers. You happen to be experiencing partial IP connectivity loss. Refer towards the following diagram. None in the servers or other computers has any static routes configured on them. The server at address 10.250.12.10 has 10.250.12.1 configured as its default gateway. The hosts on the 172.16.45.0 subnet have 172.16.45.ten configured as their default gateway. You execute some ping and traceroute commands and notice the following outcomes: Mcitp
Host 10.250.12.ten and also the hosts on the 172.16.45.0 subnet are able to reach host 192.168.1.100. The hosts on the 172.16.45.0 subnet are in a position to reach one particular one other. The hosts on the 172.16.45.0 subnet aren't in a position to reach host 10.250.12.ten. Upon establishing a Telnet session with the router at 10.250.12.1, you learn that this router is configured using a static route for the 172.16.45.0/24 subnet. Which 1 with the following actions will probably resolve the connectivity concern you are experiencing?

A. ...
... Take away the static route you noticed in the router.
B. Add static routes within the hosts on the 172.16.45.0 subnet towards the ten.250.12.0/24 subnet.
C. Add a static route towards the 10.250.12.0/24 subnet in the other router.
D. Add two static routes to host 192.168.1.100, each directed toward one particular with the other two subnets.
E. Configure the hosts on the 172.16.45.0 subnet with all the right default gateway.

Answer: C. Since the hosts on the 172.16.45.0 subnet currently have default gateways set for their nearby router, adding static routes to acquire to a comptia security certification
remote network will not adjust their connectivity. Further- additional, you understand that the default gateway configured on the two hosts on that subnet is already cor- rect considering that every 1 can reach host 192.168.1.100 with out becoming configured with any static routes. Since the router on the left is already configured to become in a position to reach the 172.16.45.0 sub- net, the issue lies with the router on the correct not getting in a position to reach the ten.250.12.0 subnet. Establishing a static route for this purpose in the router on the proper will establish full connectivity