Refer to the Exhibit.
— Exhibit –user@router> show system users
9:28PM up 2 days, 3:02, 2 users, load averages: 0.06, 0.13, 0.09
USER TTY FROM LOGIN@ IDLE WHAT
lab u0 – 9:13PM – -cli (cli)
admin p0 10.210.15.30 9:45PM – -cli (cli)
— Exhibit –Referring to the exhibit, which two statements are true? (Choose two.)

Refer to the Exhibit.
— Exhibit –user@R1> show route 2.2.2.2
user@R1> show route forwarding-table destination 2.2.2.2
Routing table: default.inet
Internet:
Destination Type RtRef Next hop Type Index NhRef Netif
2.2.2.2/32 user 1 17.1.1.2 ucst 642 9 xe-1/1/0.0
— Exhibit –Referring to the exhibit, which statement is true about transit traffic sent to 2.2.2.2?

Refer to the Exhibit.

— Exhibit –user@R1> show route forwarding-table destination 2.2.2.2
user@R1> show route 2.2.2.2
inet.0: 10 destinations, 10 routes (10 active, 0 holddown, 0 hidden)
+ = Active Route, – = Last Active, * = Both
2.2.2.2/32 *[OSPF/10] 2w3d 22:19:41, metric 1
> to 17.1.1.2 via xe-1/1/0.0
— Exhibit –Referring to the exhibit, which statement is true about transit traffic sent to 2.2.2.2?

Refer to the Exhibit.
— Exhibit –user@R1> show pfe statistics traffic
Packet Forwarding Engine traffic statistics:
Input packets: 47593914461368 2 pps
Output packets: 28805646 3 pps
Packet Forwarding Engine local traffic statistics:
Local packets input : 36278104324

Local packets output : 2
Software input control plane drops : 0
Software input high drops : 0
Software input medium drops : 0
Software input low drops : 0
Software output drops : 0
Hardware input drops : 191367536738
Packet Forwarding Engine local protocol statistics:
HDLC keepalives : 0
ATM OAM : 0
Frame Relay LMI : 0
PPP LCP/NCP : 0
OSPF hello : 3883169
OSPF3 hello : 0
RSVP hello : 1440704
LDP hello : 4782297
BFD : 0
IS-IS IIH : 0
LACP : 0
ARP : 765512
ETHER OAM : 0
Unknown : 1897610
Packet Forwarding Engine hardware discard statistics:
Timeout : 0
Truncated key : 0
Bits to test : 0
Data error : 0

Stack underflow : 0
Stack overflow : 0
Normal discard : 191367536738
Extended discard : 0
Invalid interface : 0
Info cell drops : 191367536738
Fabric drops : 191367536738
Packet Forwarding Engine Input IPv4 Header Checksum Error and Output MTU Error statistics:
Input Checksum : 0
Output MTU : 0
— Exhibit –Referring to the exhibit, which counter indicates a possible denial of service attack?

Refer to the Exhibit.
— Exhibit –user@R1> show configuration interfaces lo0
unit 5 {
family inet {
filter {
input JUNOS;
}
address 5.5.5.5/32;
}
}
user@R1> show configuration firewall family inet filter JUNOS
term term1 {
from {
protocol tcp;
port [ telnet ftp ftp-data snmp ssh syslog http tacacs 64644 1024-65535 ];
}
then {
log;
accept;
}
}
term default {
then {
discard;

}
}
— Exhibit –Referring to the exhibit, which three statements are true? (Choose three.)

Refer to the Exhibit.
— Exhibit –user@R1> show configuration interfaces
xe-1/1/0 {
unit 0 {
family inet {

address 17.1.1.1/24;
}
family mpls;
}
}
user@R1> ping 17.1.1.2 size 1473 do-not-fragment
PING 17.1.1.2 (17.1.1.2): 1473 data bytes
ping: sendto: Message too long
ping: sendto: Message too long
ping: sendto: Message too long
user@R1> ping 17.1.1.2 logical-system R1 size 1472 do-not-fragment
PING 17.1.1.2 (17.1.1.2): 1472 data bytes
1480 bytes from 17.1.1.2: icmp_seq=0 ttl=64 time=0.933 ms
1480 bytes from 17.1.1.2: icmp_seq=1 ttl=64 time=0.838 ms
1480 bytes from 17.1.1.2: icmp_seq=2 ttl=64 time=4.688 ms
— Exhibit –You are using the ping command to troubleshoot a suspected MTU problem.

Refer to the Exhibit.
— Exhibit –user@r2# run show route 100.1.1.0/24 detail
inet.0: 5 destinations, 5 routes (5 active, 0 holddown, 0 hidden)
100.1.1.0/24 (1 entry, 1 announced)
*Static PreferencE. 5
Next hop typE. Reject
Address: 0x8f7b5a4
Next-hop reference count: 2
StatE.
Local AS: 65001
AgE. 59
Task: RT
Announcement bits (1): 2-KRT

AS path: 65005 I
user@r2# show protocols bgp
group ibgp {
type external;
export to-bgp;
neighbor 10.1.2.1 {
local-address 10.1.2.2;
family inet {
unicast;
}
family inet6 {
unicast;
}
peer-as 65005;
}
}
user@r2# run show bgp summary
Groups: 1 Peers: 1 Down peers: 0
Table Tot Paths Act Paths Suppressed History Damp State Pending
inet6.0
0 0 0 0 0 0
inet.0
0 0 0 0 0 0
Peer AS InPkt OutPkt OutQ Flaps Last Up/Dwn State|#Active/Received/Accepted/Damped…
10.1.2.1 65005 31 31 0 0 12:08 Establ
inet6.0: 0/0/0/0

inet.0: 0/0/0/
user@r2# show policy-options
policy-statement to-bgp {
from protocol static;
then accept;
}
user@r2# run show route advertising-protocol bgp 10.1.2.1
[edit]
user@r2#
— Exhibit –Referring to the exhibit, router r2 does not advertise the static route to peer 10.1.2.1.
What is the problem?

— Exhibit –Local traffic capture on r1:
Address resolution is OFF.
Listening on ge-5/3/0.0, capture size 1514 bytes

22:16:33.610374 Out IP (tos 0xc0, ttl 1, id 34562, offset 0, flags [none], proto: OSPF (89), length:
76) 10.1.2.1 > 224.0.0.5: OSPFv2, Hello, length 56 [len 44]
Router-ID 1.1.1.1, Backbone Area, Authentication TypE. none (0)
Options [External, LLS]
Hello Timer 10s, Dead Timer 40s, Mask 255.255.255.252, Priority 128
LLS: checksum: 0xfff6, length: 3
Extended Options (1), length: 4
Options: 0x00000001 [LSDB resync]
[edit]
user@r1# run show ospf interface
Interface State Area DR ID BDR ID Nbrs
ge-5/3/0.0 PtToPt 0.0.0.0 0.0.0.0 0.0.0.0 0
lo0.1 DR 0.0.0.0 1.1.1.1 0.0.0.0 0
[edit]
user@r1# run show ospf neighbor
————————————————————————-Local traffic capture on r2:
Address resolution is OFF.
Listening on ge-5/3/1.0, capture size 1514 bytes
22:16:42.238030 Out IP6 (class 0xc0, hlim 1, next-header: OSPF (89), length: 36)
fe80::6687:88ff:fe6c:6769 > ff02::5: OSPFv3, Hello, length 36
Router-ID 2.2.2.2, Backbone Area
Options [V6, External, Router]
Hello Timer 10s, Dead Timer 40s, Interface-ID 0.0.0.1, Priority 128
Neighbor List:

user@r2# run show ospf interface
OSPF instance is not running
— Exhibit –Refer to the Exhibit.
Referring to the exhibit, routers r1 and r2 are connected to each other by interfaces ge-5/3/0 and
ge-5/3/1 respectively. They do not become OSPF neighbors.
Which two statements are true? (Choose two.)

Refer to the Exhibit.
— Exhibit –May 20 22:27:04.010297 OSPF rcvd Hello 192.168.0.2 -> 224.0.0.5 (ge-1/1/2.0 IFL 343 area
0.0.0.0)
May 20 22:27:04.010320 Version 2, length 44, ID 10.10.10.1, area 0.0.0.1
May 20 22:27:04.010342 checksum 0x166d, authtype 0
May 20 22:27:04.010365 mask 255.255.255.252, hello_ivl 10, opts 0x12, prio 128
May 20 22:27:04.010387 dead_ivl 40, DR 192.168.0.2, BDR 0.0.0.0
May 20 22:27:07.891698 OSPF periodic xmit from 192.168.0.1 to 224.0.0.5 (IFL 2684276180 area
0.0.0.0)
May 20 22:27:12.749988 OSPF packet ignored: area mismatch (0.0.0.1) from 192.168.0.2 on intf
ge-1/1/2.0 area 0.0.0.0
May 20 22:27:12.750071 OSPF rcvd Hello 192.168.0.2 -> 224.0.0.5 (ge-1/1/2.0 IFL 343 area

0.0.0.0)
May 20 22:27:12.750095 Version 2, length 44, ID 10.10.10.1, area 0.0.0.1
May 20 22:27:12.750116 checksum 0x166d, authtype 0
May 20 22:27:12.750139 mask 255.255.255.252, hello_ivl 10, opts 0x12, prio 128
May 20 22:27:12.750161 dead_ivl 40, DR 192.168.0.2, BDR 0.0.0.0
May 20 22:27:14.393182 OSPF rcvd Hello 192.168.0.2 -> 224.0.0.5 (ge-1/1/2.0 IFL 343 area
0.0.0.0)
May 20 22:27:14.393262 Version 2, length 44, ID 10.10.10.1, area 0.0.0.0
May 20 22:27:14.393284 checksum 0x0, authtype 0
May 20 22:27:14.393307 mask 255.255.255.252, hello_ivl 50, opts 0x12, prio 128
May 20 22:27:14.393368 dead_ivl 200, DR 0.0.0.0, BDR 0.0.0.0
May 20 22:27:14.393399 OSPF packet ignored: our router ID received from 192.168.0.2 on intf
ge-1/1/2.0 area 0.0.0.0
— Exhibit –Referring to the exhibit, which two OSPF adjacency problems are present? (Choose two.)

Refer to the Exhibit.
— Exhibit –[edit]
user@router# show interfaces

ge-1/1/2 {
vlan-tagging;
unit 100 {
vlan-id 100;
family inet {
address 192.168.0.1/30;
}
}
}
lo0 {
unit 0 {
family inet {
address 10.10.10.1/32;
}
}
}
[edit]
user@router# show protocols ospf
area 0.0.0.0 {
interface ge-1/1/2.0 {
interface-type p2p;
metric 250;
}
interface lo0.0;
}
[edit]

user@router# run show ospf interface
Interface State Area DR ID BDR ID Nbrs
lo0.0 DR 0.0.0.0 10.10.10.1 0.0.0.0 0
[edit]
user@router#
— Exhibit –Referring to the exhibit, why does only the loopback interface appear in the show ospf interface
output?