Which is not an advantage of the Hub and Spoke Architecture Model?

Question

Options

• AAutomation
• BNetwork Segmentation
• CComplexity
• DBorderless

• B
  5% (1)
• C
  95% (20)

Explanation

Complexity (C) is not an advantage - it is actually a drawback of Hub and Spoke. Routing all traffic through a central hub introduces a single point of failure, increases latency for spoke-to-spoke communication, and adds administrative overhead, making the architecture inherently more complex than simpler flat models.

The distractors are all genuine advantages: Automation (A) is correct because centralized hub management enables consistent, automated policy enforcement across all spokes. Network Segmentation (B) is correct because spokes are isolated from one another and can only communicate through the controlled hub, reducing lateral attack surface. Borderless (D) is correct because the hub acts as a central aggregation point that extends connectivity across geographic locations without hard network boundaries.

Memory tip: Think of it as a wheel - spokes keep traffic organized and separated (segmentation), the hub controls everything automatically (automation), and the wheel rolls anywhere (borderless) - but the more spokes you add, the more complicated the hub becomes (complexity = disadvantage).

No community discussion yet for this question.