Which switch type is incorrectly categorized as a virtual switch?

The classification of switches into categories such as access, core, aggregation, and routing is essential for understanding their roles within a network architecture. A virtual switch is designed to connect virtual machines (VMs) and allow them to communicate in a virtualized environment.

A routing switch, while it performs the function of directing packet traffic in a network, does not inherently fall under the category of virtual switches. Routing switches typically operate at Layer 3 of the OSI model, handling IP routing and enabling communication between different network segments. Their primary function is to manage traffic between networks, which is distinct from the role of a virtual switch that focuses on connecting virtualized environments rather than routing packets.

On the other hand, access switches, core switches, and aggregation switches can integrate virtual switching functionalities, especially within a data center environment or in scenarios utilizing cloud architectures. Access switches connect end devices like computers and printers to the network, while core switches handle high-capacity data transfer at the backbone level. Aggregation switches combine multiple connections from access switches and forward the traffic to the core switch. All of these may incorporate features leaned towards supporting virtual environments.

In summary, the routing switch is inaccurately classified as a virtual switch due to its primary role in IP routing