A township board mutually redistributes EIGRP and OSPF at the boundary routers and then sees the same prefixes bounce back into each domain. Which control best reduces redistribution loop risk while still allowing selected prefixes to pass?
Select an answer to reveal the explanation.
Short Explanation
Think of painted cargo crates: once you stamp a box leaving the OSPF warehouse, you refuse that same stamp when it tries to walk back in from EIGRP. Tags plus a filter stop the bounce without shutting the dock. Mutual redistribution without that stamp-and-block game is how loops sneak in.
Full Explanation
Mutual redistribution between EIGRP and OSPF can re-advertise a prefix back into its originating domain unless the boundary marks and filters those routes. Tagging at redistribution and denying tagged prefixes on the reverse path is the classic loop-prevention pattern while still permitting intentional, untagged (or differently tagged) prefixes. Relying only on cost tweaks, full bidirectional flooding, or static defaults does not provide the same selective, protocol-aware protection.