Home networking scenario: to minimize hardware costs for a small study lab, which network topology historically requires the least hardware to set up and operate?

Introduction:
Different LAN topologies impose different hardware requirements. A budget-constrained learner building a small practice network typically wants the fewest active components and the simplest cabling. This question asks which topology historically minimized hardware needs, especially in small peer-to-peer setups.

Given Data / Assumptions:

• Very limited budget; minimal active equipment is desirable.
• Small number of nodes for study/testing purposes.
• We consider classic, widely taught topologies (bus, star, ring) and their common implementations.

Concept / Approach:
A bus topology (e.g., 10BASE2 thin coax or 10BASE5) connects all stations along a single shared cable segment with T-connectors/terminators. There is no central hub or switch required. By contrast, a star (including modern switched Ethernet) needs a central hub/switch and individual runs to each host. Token-Ring requires MAUs and specialized cabling. Therefore, in terms of pure component count and cost, the classic bus required the least dedicated hardware beyond the network interface cards and coax accessories.

Step-by-Step Solution:

Verification / Alternative check:
Historical cost comparisons from early Ethernet eras show that thin-coax bus deployments avoided the central device cost entirely, making them attractive for small labs before inexpensive switches became ubiquitous.

Why Other Options Are Wrong:

• Star / Switched Ethernet: needs a hub or switch.
• Ring / Token-Ring: needs MAUs and specialized cabling.
• Ethernet (switched star): modern default but not minimal hardware count.

Common Pitfalls:
Evaluating with today's commodity switch prices; historically, the question focuses on topology fundamentals and hardware count, where bus wins on minimalism.

Final Answer:
Bus topology.