Compared to a three-layer network architecture, which statement is true about a two-layer architecture?

In a two-layer network architecture, the design simplifies the structure of the network, which typically results in a more straightforward topology. This reduces the number of layers through which data must travel, helping to optimize the path data takes from source to destination. Since there are fewer layers, the data forwarding process can be more efficient, allowing for better performance in terms of speed and response time.

The simplification associated with a two-layer architecture often leads to reduced latency since data does not need to go through multiple hops as it would in a three-layer setup. This efficiency makes it suitable for many scenarios, particularly in environments where managing complexity and enhancing speed are critical.

In contrast, elements of the other statements highlight characteristics of a three-layer architecture or focus on misconceptions. A more complex topology usually arises in three-layer designs, where numerous elements and interconnections can be involved. This can adversely affect data forwarding efficiency due to the greater number of devices and connections in the network path. While the industry may see variations in practice, the two-layer architecture remains relevant in many contexts rather than being phased out entirely.