"since Hub use point to multi-point interface . . ."
Oh? You know this how?
I've used hub topologies with p2p links.
You're assuming the "cloud" enforces a single network? Some do, some don't.
This is one of the reasons my prior reply had additional information is needed.
The problem with option 3, it doesn't show an area zero, and without area zero none of the non-zero areas would know of the other area routes.
However, if core router had a loopback interface in area zero, it would work fine.
This is why I questioned area zero existence for option 3.
Regarding the rest of your reply, you're 100% correct about route filtering/summarization on an ABR but is this really needed for one LAN (?) network? I.e. there's overhead with areas.
Practically, I would chose option 1 over option 2, but for an text book answer, for the reasons @MHM Cisco World describes, option 2 would be considered better than option 1.
Option 3, as shown (without an area zero) wouldn't work correctly.
Assuming there is an area zero for option 3, which is better option 2:or 3?
There are pro and cons for both. My guess would be, the "book" would prefer option 2 as it distributes ABR processing. Personally, though, I'm not a fan of running area zero across WAN links, as they often are less stable.
But, in real world, for a network so small, I would likely just run a single area logical topology.
In real world, though, I would take into account other factors, so again, without such information, cannot say what's the best area design. This is an "it depends" kind of question.
Like @johnlloyd_13 I too would be curious to the "book" answer and its reasoning.
