What are two considerations for determining the master router in VRRP? (Choose two.)

Tyler and Staci are network administrators for AS1 and AS2. Which routing protocol is used for
peering between autonomous systems?

Which two commands will display the link speed of ge-0/0/0? (Choose two.)

What are two types of PVLAN broadcast domains? (Choose two).

What are two purposes of MAC move limiting? (Choose two.)

— Exhibit —
[edit routing-options]
user@R1# show
static {
route 172.29.130.0/17 next-hop 172.30.25.1;
route 172.29.13.0/24 {
next-hop 172.30.25.1;
no-readvertise;
}
route 172.29.16.0/12 next-hop 172.30.25.1;
route 172.29.20.0/24 next-hop 172.30.25.1;

}
[edit protocols ospf]
user@R1# show
export Export_OSPF;
area 0.0.0.0 {
interface ge-0/0/2.0;
interface ge-0/0/3.0;
interface lo0.0;
}
[edit policy-options]
user@R1# show
policy-statement Export_OSPF {
term match-static-routes {
from {
protocol static;
route-filter 172.29.0.0/16 orlonger;
}
then accept;
}
}
— Exhibit —
Referring to the exhibit, there is an OSPF policy to redistribute static routes.
Which routes will be propagated to OSPF neighbors?

— Exhibit —
user@R1# show interfaces
ge-0/0/8 {
unit 0 {
family inet {
address 172.25.100.2/24 {
vrrp-group 10 {
virtual-address 172.25.100.1;
priority 200;
} } } }
}
— Exhibit —
Two routers, R1 and R2, are part of a VRRP master and backup design.
Referring to the exhibit, which two statements are correct about this VRRP deployment? (Choose

two.)

— Exhibit —
interfaces {
ge-1/1/0 {
unit 0 {
family inet {
address 10.200.12.1/30;
} } }
lo0 {
unit 0 {
family inet {
address 10.200.1.1/32;
} } }
}

routing-options {
static {
route 10.200.1.2/32 next-hop 10.200.12.2;
}
autonomous-system 65001;
}
protocols {
bgp {
group 65002 {
local-address 10.200.1.1;
neighbor 10.200.1.2 {
peer-as 65002;
} } }
}
— Exhibit —
Referring to the exhibit, you are configuring an EBGP peering using the loopback address
between two routers.
Which parameter is needed to complete the configuration?

— Exhibit —
user@router> show configuration | no-more
…
interfaces {
ge-0/0/0 {
unit 0 {
family inet {
address 10.210.12.131/27;
} } }
ge-0/0/1 {
unit 0 {
family inet {
filter {
input fbf;
}
address 10.210.14.1/24;
} } }
}
firewall {
filter fbf {
term 1 {

then {
routing-instance fbf;
} } }
}
routing-instances {
fbf {
instance-type forwarding;
routing-options {
static {
route 0.0.0.0/0 next-hop 10.210.12.129;
} } }
}
user@router> show route
inet.0: 4 destinations, 4 routes (4 active, 0 holddown, 0 hidden)
+ = Active Route, – = Last Active, * = Both
10.210.12.128/27 *[Direct/0] 3d 23:21:02
> via ge-0/0/0.0
10.210.12.131/32 *[Local/0] 3d 23:21:17
Local via ge-0/0/0.0
10.210.14.0/24 *[Direct/0] 00:00:07
> via ge-0/0/1.0
10.210.14.1/32 *[Local/0] 00:00:07

Local via ge-0/0/1.0
— Exhibit —
What is causing the behavior shown in the exhibit?

The switches shown in the exhibit were just powered on.

What is required to ensure that both of Switch B’s ports are in a forwarding state?