A network engineer notices that traffic to a critical server is being dropped intermittently. The server is reachable via a static route on the Juniper router. The engineer checks the routing table and sees the route is present. Which operational command should the engineer use next to isolate the issue?
Shows the forwarding table entry used by the PFE.
Why this answer
Option D is correct because the `show route forwarding-table destination 10.0.0.1` command displays the actual forwarding entry in the kernel's forwarding table (FIB). Even if the route is present in the routing table (RIB), a mismatch between the RIB and FIB can cause traffic drops. This command directly verifies whether the route has been installed into the forwarding table, isolating the issue to a possible hardware or kernel programming failure.
Exam trap
The trap here is that candidates assume a route present in the routing table guarantees it is being used for forwarding, but Junos separates control plane (RIB) from forwarding plane (FIB), so the FIB must be checked separately to identify programming failures.
How to eliminate wrong answers
Option A is wrong because `show interfaces terse` only displays interface status and configuration, not the routing or forwarding state for a specific destination. Option B is wrong because `show route 10.0.0.1` shows the route in the routing table (RIB), which the engineer already confirmed is present; it does not reveal whether the route is correctly programmed into the forwarding table (FIB). Option C is wrong because `show arp` displays the ARP cache for resolving next-hop MAC addresses, but the issue is about traffic being dropped despite a valid route, not about Layer 2 resolution failures.