Root protection (root guard) must always be applied on the ports of the switches you trust to remain root-bridge-eligible, specifically on the interfaces facing away from the legitimate root and toward parts of the network where an untrusted or rogue device could plausibly appear and begin transmitting superior BPDUs. In this topology, Switch-1 is the intended, permanent root bridge (lowest priority, 4k), and Switch-2 is its aggregation-layer peer; both sit above the access layer, where Switch-3 and Switch-4 connect downstream toward end-user-facing infrastructure and where an accidental or malicious rogue switch is realistically most likely to be introduced. The ge-
0/0/6 and ge- 0/0/8 interfaces on Switch-1 and Switch-2 are precisely the downlink ports facing that access layer, meaning they are the exact points at which a rogue switch's superior BPDU (one advertising a lower priority than the legitimate root) would first be received if such a device appeared beneath Switch-3 or Switch-4. Applying root protection on those specific interfaces causes Junos to immediately block (move to a root-inconsistent, discarding state) any port that receives a superior BPDU, preventing the rogue device from ever being accepted as root, while normal, non-superior BPDUs continue to be processed without disruption. Applying root guard on Switch-1 and Switch-2's peer link (ge- 0/0/12/13) would be inappropriate, since that link legitimately connects two trusted, root-eligible switches.

A is correct because you need to configure BGP multihop to enable redundancy for the EBGP peering between the two routers. BGP multihop is a feature that allows BGP peers to establish a session over multiple hops, instead of requiring them to be directly connected. By default, EBGP peers use a time-to-live (TTL) value of 1 for their packets, which means that they can only reach adjacent neighbors. However, if you configure BGP multihop with a higher TTL value, you can allow EBGP peers to communicate over multiple routers in between. This can provide redundancy in case of a link failure or a router failure between the EBGP peers.
B is correct because you need to configure loopback interface peering to enable redundancy for the EBGP peering between the two routers. Loopback interface peering is a technique that uses loopback interfaces as the source and destination addresses for BGP sessions, instead of physical interfaces. Loopback interfaces are virtual interfaces that are always up and reachable as long as the router is operational. By using loopback interface peering, you can avoid the dependency on a single physical interface or link for the BGP session, and use multiple paths to reach the loopback address of the peer. This can provide redundancy and load balancing for the EBGP peering.
C is correct because you need to configure routes for the peer loopback interface IP addresses to enable redundancy for the EBGP peering between the two routers. Routes for the peer loopback interface IP addresses are necessary to ensure that the routers can reach each other's loopback addresses over multiple hops. You can use static routes or dynamic routing protocols to advertise and learn the routes for the peer loopback interface IP addresses. Without these routes, the routers will not be able to establish or maintain the BGP session using their loopback interfaces.