In which way does a spine-and-leaf architecture allow for scalability in a network when additional access ports are required?
A spine switch and a leaf switch can be added with redundant connections between them.
A spine switch can be added with at least 40 GB uplinks.
A leaf switch can be added with connections to every spine switch.
A leaf switch can be added with a single connection to a core spine switch.
By connecting a leaf switch to an edge switch.
Answer C: In a spine-and-leaf architecture, each leaf switch is connected to all existing spine switches. This ensures low latency and uniform response times, while offering the flexibility to add capacity to the network.
Answer A: Although redundancy is a key feature of the spine-and-leaf architecture, simply adding a spine switch and a leaf switch with redundant connections doesn’t describe how this architecture handles extension when adding access ports.
Answer B: The addition of a spine switch with uplinks of a certain capacity does not directly describe how the “spine-and-leaf” architecture handles scalability linked to access ports. The capacity of uplinks is a technical detail, but not at the heart of the question posed.
Answer D: In “spine-and-leaf” architecture, a leaf switch doesn’t connect to a single central spine switch, but to all spine switches. It is this complete connectivity that offers the advantage of low latency and flexibility.
Answer E: The notion of “edge switch” is not typical in a discussion of spine-and-leaf architecture. This choice introduces an element that is not relevant to the “spine-and-leaf” structure.