The correct answer is B. An IDS is less disruptive during the initial deployment of the technology . An Intrusion Detection System (IDS) is designed to monitor and alert on suspicious activity, but it does not sit inline to actively block traffic the way an Intrusion Prevention System (IPS) does. Because of that, deploying an IDS usually has less immediate impact on production traffic. It can be introduced to observe network behavior and generate alerts without risking accidental interruption of legitimate communications.
That makes IDS a safer first step in many environments, especially when teams are still tuning signatures, thresholds, or alert rules. If an IPS is deployed too aggressively before it is properly tuned, it may block valid traffic and create service issues. An IDS avoids that risk because it focuses on visibility rather than enforcement.
The other options are weaker. A is not always guaranteed, since processing needs depend on implementation and traffic volume. C is not a defining advantage of IDS over IPS. D is also not reliable, because false positives can occur with either technology depending on configuration and signatures.
For Network+ study purposes, the standard advantage of IDS is that it is passive and less disruptive , especially during initial rollout and monitoring phases.
