A retail chain runs EIGRP across 600 stores with slow WAN links where a single branch flap triggers queries that stall convergence network-wide. The design must limit query range and keep branch routers from transiting traffic. Which EIGRP query scoping approach using stub and summarization best contains this problem?

The correct approach works because EIGRP stub on the 600 spokes signals they will not be queried for transit paths and will not carry transit traffic, while a summary at the distribution collapses branch prefixes so a single flap no longer forces an end-to-end Stuck-In-Active search across slow WAN links, directly containing query range and stabilizing convergence. Summarization positioned only at the WAN core remains valid aggregation for policy but fails to contain queries where needed because branch specifics still traverse distribution and slow links before aggregation, so flaps still trigger wide queries and delay. Advertising full specific routes from a stub is operationally sound for optimal routing in small domains but fails here because without distribution summarization every loss still prompts detailed queries and large updates that overwhelm low-bandwidth links and defeat the scoping goal. Keeping summarization at distribution while leaving branches as transit-capable is common for resilience but fails the explicit no-transit constraint and leaves branches eligible for queries and alternate-path installation, preserving the stall risk. For exams, distinguish where summarization occurs and whether stub transit is prohibited rather than matching keywords alone, as placement determines query boundary. In practice verify with show commands for neighbor stub status and summarized routes and lab a branch flap to confirm queries stop at distribution and no transit path installs through a spoke.