Which configuration provides connectivity from the test routing instance to the 192.168.3.0/24 subnet in inet.0?

The configuration that provides connectivity from the test routing instance to the 192.168.3.0/24 subnet in inet.0 is best achieved through a routing option that includes rib-groups, such as setting up a rib-group master2test.inet.0 along with a static route.

Rib-groups are utilized to facilitate the exchange of routing information between routing instances, allowing them to share routes and making it possible for a test routing instance to reach other subnets that are defined in a different routing table, such as inet.0. In this scenario, by configuring a rib-group that connects the test instance to inet.0, any routes within the master routing instance can be made available for the test instance to utilize. The static route ensures that there is a specific path defined for reaching the 192.168.3.0/24 subnet.

In contrast, while defining a static route by itself can provide a viable path, it does not inherently facilitate the necessary connections between routing instances. An export policy is useful for controlling which routes are shared but does not, by itself, enable connectivity unless specific routes are included. Additionally, configuring rib-groups solely for forwarding instances, without the appropriate associations or static routes, would not create