Visit here for our full Amazon AWS Certified Advanced Networking – Specialty ANS-C01 exam dumps and practice test questions.
Question 101
Which architecture offers the most efficient and scalable method for implementing micro-segmentation across multiple AWS accounts and VPCs while maintaining centralized security policy management and minimal latency?
A) Deploy individual AWS Network Firewalls in each VPC with decentralized rule sets managed locally
B) Use AWS Transit Gateway with centralized inspection via AWS Network Firewall in a shared security VPC, leveraging route tables for segmentation
C) Establish multiple VPC peering connections between accounts and enforce security groups for segmentation
D) Implement distributed stateful inspection on EC2 instances using open-source firewalls and manual policy enforcement
Answer: B
Explanation:
Micro-segmentation, the practice of creating granular security zones to control lateral movement of threats within a network, is a critical element in modern cloud architectures, especially in multi-account environments where isolation and centralized policy enforcement are paramount.
The most efficient and scalable method to achieve this within AWS involves leveraging AWS Transit Gateway to interconnect multiple VPCs across accounts and regions, combined with AWS Network Firewall deployed centrally in a dedicated security VPC. This shared security VPC acts as a centralized inspection point through which traffic is routed and filtered according to consistent, organization-wide security policies.
The Transit Gateway’s advanced route table management allows traffic to be segmented based on source and destination, effectively isolating workloads while still routing them through the firewall for inspection. This architecture reduces operational overhead by centralizing firewall policy management, eliminates the need to configure and maintain firewalls in every VPC, and significantly decreases the latency compared to routing traffic over multiple hops.
Option A — deploying individual firewalls in every VPC — increases administrative complexity and the risk of inconsistent policies, while option C’s reliance on VPC peering does not scale well in large environments and lacks centralized inspection capabilities. Option D, implementing firewalls at the instance level, is resource-intensive, error-prone, and introduces operational burden with manual policy updates and monitoring.
Therefore, using Transit Gateway with centralized AWS Network Firewall in a security VPC represents the best architecture for scalable, efficient micro-segmentation across multiple accounts and VPCs, aligning with cloud-native security best practices.
Question 102
In designing a high-throughput, low-latency hybrid connectivity solution between AWS and multiple remote data centers with diverse WAN technologies, which approach ensures optimized traffic flow and dynamic failover without manual route adjustments?
A) Configure individual Site-to-Site VPN tunnels with static routing to each data center over the internet
B) Use AWS Direct Connect with Link Aggregation Groups (LAG), integrate with AWS Transit Gateway, and enable BGP dynamic routing for path failover
C) Establish dedicated MPLS connections for each data center and manually manage routing policies with VPN backup
D) Employ multiple Direct Connect circuits terminated at separate VPCs without centralized routing
Answer: B
Explanation:
When architecting hybrid connectivity for multiple geographically distributed data centers with heterogeneous WAN technologies, the design must support high throughput, low latency, and automated failover to prevent disruptions and reduce operational overhead.
The ideal solution involves establishing AWS Direct Connect links aggregated via Link Aggregation Groups (LAG) to increase bandwidth and provide redundancy. These Direct Connect links are integrated with an AWS Transit Gateway, which acts as a centralized routing hub interconnecting VPCs and on-premises data centers.
Dynamic routing protocols like BGP are enabled to automate route propagation and failover, ensuring that traffic is dynamically rerouted through alternate paths without manual intervention. This configuration reduces latency by leveraging private, dedicated connections and enables scalable management of routing policies across diverse WAN technologies.
Option A’s use of static Site-to-Site VPNs is prone to management complexity and does not scale well. Option C’s MPLS with manual routing adjustments increases operational complexity and costs. Option D lacks centralized routing, which can cause inconsistent routing decisions and failover limitations.
Thus, integrating Direct Connect with LAG, Transit Gateway, and BGP dynamic routing offers a resilient, scalable, and low-latency hybrid connectivity design optimized for diverse WAN environments.
Question 103
Which AWS service combination best supports centralized management and automated auditing of network access policies across multi-account environments, ensuring compliance with strict regulatory standards?
A) Use individual IAM policies per account and perform manual audits quarterly
B) Implement AWS Firewall Manager with AWS Organizations for centralized deployment of AWS Network Firewall policies and automated compliance monitoring
C) Rely on security groups managed independently by each account and conduct manual configuration reviews
D) Use AWS Config rules only for VPC security group compliance without centralized policy enforcement
Answer: B
Explanation:
Centralized management of network access policies and compliance auditing across multi-account AWS environments is essential for organizations subject to strict regulatory requirements such as HIPAA, PCI DSS, and GDPR.
AWS Firewall Manager, when integrated with AWS Organizations, offers a comprehensive solution by allowing centralized deployment, management, and monitoring of firewall policies — including AWS Network Firewall rulesets — across all accounts in the organization. Firewall Manager automates policy propagation and continuously monitors for non-compliant resources, generating alerts or remediation actions automatically.
This centralized approach minimizes manual errors, accelerates compliance reporting, and enforces uniform security policies across all network boundaries. Firewall Manager also supports security group policies and third-party firewall solutions, extending its capabilities.
Option A’s manual IAM policy management is prone to errors and delays. Option C’s decentralized security group management lacks automation and consistent policy enforcement. Option D’s AWS Config rules only provide compliance checks without active policy enforcement or remediation.
Therefore, leveraging AWS Firewall Manager with AWS Organizations provides the most effective, automated, and centralized framework to manage and audit network access policies, ensuring regulatory compliance across multiple accounts.
Question 104
How can a network architect design a cost-effective and scalable AWS multi-region disaster recovery (DR) solution that minimizes data loss and recovery time for an application deployed in production in one region?
A) Use Cross-Region Replication for data storage with automated failover to a secondary region using Route 53 health checks and weighted routing
B) Deploy manual snapshots in the primary region and restore them in the secondary region during failover
C) Establish a Site-to-Site VPN between regions and route all traffic through the secondary region at all times
D) Use VPC peering between regions to replicate all data and redirect traffic during outages
Answer: A
Explanation:
Designing an effective disaster recovery solution in AWS requires balancing cost, data durability, and recovery objectives such as Recovery Time Objective (RTO) and Recovery Point Objective (RPO).
A best practice is to utilize Cross-Region Replication (CRR) for Amazon S3 data, Amazon RDS read replicas, or DynamoDB global tables to asynchronously replicate data to a secondary AWS region, ensuring minimal data loss. Coupling this with Amazon Route 53 health checks and weighted routing enables automated or manual DNS failover to the secondary region if the primary region becomes unhealthy.
This setup allows for near-real-time data synchronization while minimizing costs compared to active-active deployments. The DNS failover mechanism ensures traffic reroutes efficiently with minimal downtime and no need for complex network configurations.
Option B’s manual snapshots are prone to longer recovery times and higher risk of data loss. Option C’s Site-to-Site VPN across regions is inefficient for disaster recovery traffic and incurs continuous costs. Option D’s VPC peering does not support multi-region connections and cannot be used for replication or routing failover.
Thus, using Cross-Region Replication combined with Route 53 automated failover delivers a cost-effective, scalable, and resilient disaster recovery solution aligned with AWS architectural best practices.
Question 105
What is the most secure and operationally efficient strategy to manage private connectivity for serverless applications requiring access to on-premises databases hosted behind firewalls?
A) Configure AWS VPN client connections on Lambda functions to connect directly to on-premises databases
B) Use AWS PrivateLink to create an interface VPC endpoint that connects securely to on-premises resources via Direct Connect and Transit Gateway
C) Allow public internet access to on-premises databases with IP whitelisting and enforce SSL/TLS encryption
D) Deploy EC2 instances as proxy servers within VPCs and configure Lambda functions to access these proxies
Answer: B
Explanation:
Serverless architectures, such as those using AWS Lambda, require a highly secure, low-latency method to access on-premises resources like databases, which are often protected by firewalls and inaccessible over the public internet.
AWS PrivateLink provides private connectivity between VPCs and on-premises networks via interface VPC endpoints, enabling traffic to traverse a secure, private path without exposing resources to the internet. When integrated with AWS Direct Connect and Transit Gateway, PrivateLink ensures that Lambda functions can securely access on-premises databases with high availability and minimal latency.
This architecture offloads network complexity from Lambda, enhances security by preventing exposure to the internet, and simplifies connectivity management. It also scales transparently as demand grows.
Option A’s VPN client setup on Lambda is impractical and unsupported at scale. Option C exposes databases to public internet traffic, increasing security risk despite encryption. Option D’s use of proxy EC2 instances introduces operational overhead, potential bottlenecks, and single points of failure.
Therefore, leveraging AWS PrivateLink integrated with Direct Connect and Transit Gateway offers the most secure and operationally efficient connectivity solution for serverless applications accessing protected on-premises databases.
Question 106
What is the optimal approach to enable seamless and secure multi-region service-to-service communication between containerized microservices deployed on Amazon EKS clusters, while maintaining strict compliance with zero-trust security models?
A) Use public internet-facing ALBs in each region with IP whitelisting and TLS encryption
B) Implement AWS App Mesh with cross-region mesh federation over AWS PrivateLink and mutual TLS authentication
C) Configure VPC peering between EKS clusters in different regions and enforce security groups for traffic control
D) Deploy EC2-based bastion hosts in each region to relay traffic between services over encrypted SSH tunnels
Answer: B
Explanation:
Enabling secure, seamless, multi-region service-to-service communication for containerized microservices requires careful consideration of networking, security, and compliance requirements. The ideal solution must minimize latency, prevent unauthorized lateral movement, and ensure compliance with stringent zero-trust security principles, where no implicit trust is granted regardless of network location.
AWS App Mesh is a service mesh that provides application-level networking features such as traffic routing, service discovery, and observability. It supports mutual TLS (mTLS) encryption between services, enforcing authentication and encryption of all traffic, a core requirement of zero-trust models.
For multi-region deployments, cross-region mesh federation allows different App Mesh instances in separate AWS regions to interoperate, creating a unified service mesh. This setup ensures secure, encrypted communication channels without relying on the public internet.
When combined with AWS PrivateLink, the service mesh can expose service endpoints privately over AWS’s internal network, bypassing the public internet entirely. This avoids exposure to external threats and reduces latency by utilizing private network paths.
Option A exposes services publicly, relying on IP whitelisting, which is insufficient for zero-trust models. Option C’s VPC peering across regions is not supported and doesn’t address the complexities of service mesh security or multi-region communication. Option D’s bastion host approach adds operational complexity, latency, and single points of failure, and lacks native service mesh capabilities.
Thus, AWS App Mesh with cross-region federation over AWS PrivateLink provides the most effective and compliant architecture for secure, zero-trust multi-region microservice communication in EKS.
Question 107
When architecting an AWS environment that requires automated detection and mitigation of Distributed Denial of Service (DDoS) attacks at the edge with minimal impact on legitimate traffic, which combination of AWS services delivers the most comprehensive protection?
A) Use AWS Shield Advanced integrated with Amazon CloudFront and AWS WAF, configured with rate-based rules and real-time alerting
B) Deploy AWS Network Firewall in all VPCs with static deny rules for known malicious IPs and manual incident response
C) Rely on security groups and NACLs to block high-volume traffic patterns, combined with manual log analysis
D) Utilize Amazon Inspector to scan for vulnerabilities and respond to DDoS incidents with manual firewall updates
Answer: A
Explanation:
Distributed Denial of Service (DDoS) attacks pose significant risks to availability and can cause substantial operational disruption. An effective defense requires automated, scalable detection and mitigation mechanisms deployed as close to the edge as possible, to absorb and block malicious traffic before it reaches internal resources.
AWS Shield Advanced is a managed DDoS protection service that provides enhanced detection and mitigation capabilities beyond the standard Shield protections, including integration with AWS WAF (Web Application Firewall) and Amazon CloudFront (CDN).
Deploying Amazon CloudFront as a global content delivery network edge layer helps absorb and mitigate volumetric attacks by distributing traffic globally and caching content close to users. AWS WAF integrated with CloudFront allows the creation of rate-based rules to automatically block traffic exceeding defined thresholds, mitigating layer 7 attacks like HTTP floods.
Real-time alerting and integration with AWS Shield Advanced’s DDoS response team enable rapid incident response. The combination of these services ensures the detection of diverse attack vectors, automated mitigation, and minimal impact on legitimate traffic by using granular, dynamic rules.
Option B’s reliance on AWS Network Firewall with static deny rules is less effective against dynamic, large-scale attacks and requires manual updates. Option C’s use of security groups and NACLs is insufficient for large-scale DDoS protection and lacks automation. Option D focuses on vulnerability scanning and manual intervention, which is too slow and reactive for DDoS defense.
Therefore, combining AWS Shield Advanced with CloudFront and AWS WAF represents the most comprehensive and proactive solution for automated DDoS detection and mitigation at the AWS edge.
Question 108
In a scenario where an enterprise requires detailed flow-level visibility into VPC traffic for forensic and troubleshooting purposes, which AWS solution provides the most granular and scalable method for capturing and analyzing network traffic?
A) Enable VPC Flow Logs, export logs to Amazon S3, and analyze with Amazon Athena and AWS Glue for querying and transformation
B) Deploy packet capture tools on all EC2 instances to monitor traffic locally and send logs to a centralized logging system
C) Use CloudTrail to capture all API activity and infer network flow patterns from service calls
D) Implement AWS Config to monitor resource configurations and network ACL changes only
Answer: A
Explanation:
Achieving detailed flow-level visibility within VPCs is essential for network forensic analysis, performance troubleshooting, and security investigations. This requires scalable capture of metadata about IP traffic going to and from network interfaces.
VPC Flow Logs provide comprehensive metadata about all IP traffic flowing through Elastic Network Interfaces (ENIs) within a VPC. These logs include source and destination IP addresses, ports, protocols, traffic volume, and timestamps, enabling network traffic flow analysis.
Exporting VPC Flow Logs to Amazon S3 enables durable, cost-effective storage with nearly unlimited capacity. Integrating with Amazon Athena allows interactive querying of logs using standard SQL without requiring infrastructure provisioning. AWS Glue can be used to catalog and transform log data, making it easier to analyze with other AWS analytics tools.
This combination provides a highly scalable and flexible solution for granular network flow visibility without the overhead of deploying and managing packet capture appliances.
Option B’s manual packet capture on each instance is operationally expensive, difficult to scale, and may miss traffic flowing outside instances. Option C’s use of CloudTrail captures API calls, not actual network flows, so it is insufficient for flow-level analysis. Option D’s AWS Config only monitors resource changes and is not designed for traffic visibility.
Thus, VPC Flow Logs combined with S3, Athena, and Glue delivers the most scalable, detailed, and cost-effective approach for comprehensive VPC traffic visibility and analysis.
Question 109
For an AWS environment hosting sensitive financial workloads requiring compliance with encryption at rest and in transit, which strategy best enforces comprehensive encryption controls without adding excessive operational complexity?
A) Use default AWS-managed encryption keys (SSE-S3) for all storage and rely on TLS for all network communications
B) Implement AWS Key Management Service (KMS) customer-managed keys (CMKs) with granular IAM policies, combined with enforcing TLS 1.2+ in all services
C) Rely solely on application-level encryption and avoid using AWS native encryption capabilities to maintain control
D) Use unencrypted storage and secure access via VPN tunnels only
Answer: B
Explanation:
Sensitive financial workloads require strict compliance with encryption policies both at rest and in transit. The solution must not only enforce encryption but also provide key lifecycle management, auditability, and fine-grained access control to meet regulatory standards.
Using AWS Key Management Service (KMS) with customer-managed keys (CMKs) offers centralized control over cryptographic keys, including key rotation, policy-based access control, and detailed audit logging via AWS CloudTrail. This enables compliance teams to validate that encryption is consistently applied and that access to keys is tightly restricted.
Enforcing TLS 1.2 or higher across all network communications ensures data in transit is encrypted with up-to-date protocols, mitigating risks of interception or downgrade attacks.
Option A’s reliance on default AWS-managed keys (SSE-S3) lacks granular access controls and auditability needed for highly sensitive workloads. Option C’s exclusive use of application-level encryption is complex to implement and maintain at scale, risking inconsistency and human error. Option D’s lack of encryption at rest violates fundamental security best practices and compliance mandates.
Therefore, combining KMS customer-managed keys with enforced TLS provides the most secure, auditable, and operationally manageable encryption strategy for sensitive financial workloads on AWS.
Question 110
Which method provides the most reliable and scalable solution for controlling outbound internet traffic from multiple VPCs in a large enterprise, while allowing centralized monitoring and consistent security policies?
A) Configure individual NAT Gateways in each VPC and monitor logs separately in each account
B) Route all outbound traffic through centralized egress VPC with AWS Network Firewall and use Transit Gateway to connect other VPCs
C) Use public IP addresses for instances in each VPC and rely on security groups for outbound control
D) Deploy proxy servers in each VPC for outbound traffic and manage them independently
Answer: B
Explanation:
Controlling outbound internet traffic across multiple VPCs at scale requires a centralized, manageable, and secure architecture that enforces consistent security policies and provides consolidated monitoring.
Routing all outbound traffic through a centralized egress VPC that contains AWS Network Firewall allows the enterprise to implement uniform inspection, logging, and filtering of all outbound flows. Using AWS Transit Gateway to interconnect all VPCs to this egress VPC simplifies routing and eliminates the need for individual NAT gateways or proxy servers in each VPC.
This design centralizes policy enforcement, reduces operational overhead, and enables scalable monitoring via unified logging platforms. Network Firewall supports stateful inspection, intrusion prevention, and granular rule enforcement across all outbound traffic.
Option A’s use of multiple NAT gateways leads to fragmented monitoring and policy management, increasing complexity. Option C exposes instances to the internet directly, reducing security. Option D’s proxy servers introduce operational complexity, potential bottlenecks, and inconsistent policy enforcement.
Hence, the centralized egress VPC with Network Firewall and Transit Gateway integration is the most scalable and reliable method for outbound internet traffic control with centralized visibility.
Question 111
In a scenario where an organization must maintain extremely low-latency connections between hybrid on-premises data centers and AWS workloads across multiple regions, which AWS architecture provides the most consistent network performance while maintaining security compliance?
A) Use VPN connections with dynamic routing from each on-premises site to AWS regions and rely on security groups for traffic filtering
B) Implement AWS Direct Connect dedicated connections to each region, combined with Transit Gateway for centralized routing and AWS Network Firewall for traffic inspection
C) Deploy internet-based Site-to-Site VPN connections with IPsec tunnels terminating at regional NAT gateways
D) Use AWS Client VPN endpoints from each on-premises network to connect to multiple VPCs across regions
Answer: B
Explanation:
Achieving ultra-low latency and high-performance network connections between on-premises infrastructure and AWS workloads across multiple regions is a significant challenge, especially when security compliance is a requirement. The optimal solution must balance latency, bandwidth consistency, reliability, and security enforcement.
AWS Direct Connect provides dedicated physical network connections between an on-premises location and AWS, bypassing the public internet and delivering predictable, high-throughput network performance. For multi-region deployments, establishing dedicated connections to each critical region ensures minimal latency and consistent throughput.
Integrating AWS Transit Gateway allows all VPCs across regions to communicate through a central hub, simplifying network topology and eliminating complex point-to-point routing configurations. This approach also supports dynamic route propagation using BGP (Border Gateway Protocol), which ensures traffic follows the most efficient path while enabling high availability and failover scenarios.
For security compliance, all traffic passing through the Transit Gateway can be inspected by AWS Network Firewall, which provides stateful traffic inspection, intrusion prevention, and detailed logging. This ensures that sensitive data is monitored and protected while maintaining strict regulatory compliance.
Option A using VPN connections cannot reliably provide low-latency connections across regions due to internet variability and bandwidth limitations. Option C’s IPsec VPN tunnels over NAT gateways introduce unnecessary latency and operational complexity. Option D’s Client VPN endpoints are designed for user-level remote access rather than high-throughput hybrid connectivity, making them unsuitable for enterprise-scale hybrid workloads.
By combining Direct Connect, Transit Gateway, and Network Firewall, organizations can achieve a low-latency, secure, scalable, and compliance-ready architecture for hybrid AWS and on-premises networking.
Question 112
When designing a high-throughput, fault-tolerant VPC-to-VPC architecture across multiple regions for sensitive workloads, which approach ensures consistent private connectivity while reducing operational overhead?
A) Configure multiple point-to-point VPC peering connections between all VPCs in different regions with individual security groups for control
B) Use AWS Transit Gateway with inter-region peering and route tables to orchestrate centralized connectivity while enforcing traffic inspection using Network Firewall
C) Deploy EC2 instances as NAT instances for routing traffic between VPCs in different regions
D) Connect VPCs through public internet endpoints using TLS encryption and IP whitelisting
Answer: B
Explanation:
High-throughput, fault-tolerant VPC-to-VPC communication across multiple regions requires a design that simplifies management, reduces latency, ensures security, and scales automatically. The most effective architecture leverages AWS native networking services rather than manual routing or ad hoc configurations.
AWS Transit Gateway enables central hub-and-spoke connectivity, where multiple VPCs can interconnect through a single gateway. Transit Gateway supports inter-region peering, which allows VPCs in different AWS regions to communicate privately without traversing the public internet. This results in lower latency, higher bandwidth, and consistent network performance compared to multiple VPC peering connections.
Traffic routing is simplified with Transit Gateway route tables, allowing administrators to centrally manage which VPCs can communicate and how traffic flows between regions. This reduces the complexity of managing multiple individual peering connections.
AWS Network Firewall can be integrated into this architecture to provide stateful inspection, intrusion prevention, and logging. This ensures that all inter-VPC traffic is monitored and meets security compliance requirements without introducing operational bottlenecks.
Option A’s multiple point-to-point peering connections are complex to manage at scale and lack centralized policy enforcement. Option C’s NAT instances introduce single points of failure, increase operational overhead, and limit throughput. Option D exposes traffic to the public internet, which increases security risks and latency, making it unsuitable for sensitive workloads.
Hence, Transit Gateway with inter-region peering and Network Firewall is the most reliable, scalable, and secure solution for multi-region VPC-to-VPC connectivity.
Question 113
An organization wants to implement a cost-effective, highly available, and scalable solution for distributing application traffic to multiple microservices running across different AWS regions. Which architecture best achieves this requirement?
A) Use public Application Load Balancers in each region with Route 53 latency-based routing to distribute traffic
B) Deploy AWS Global Accelerator to provide static IP addresses with intelligent routing to regional Application Load Balancers, combined with health checks for automatic failover
C) Implement VPC peering between regions and manually route traffic from a central EC2 instance
D) Configure CloudFront to route traffic to microservices in each region over public internet endpoints
Answer: B
Explanation:
Distributing traffic to multiple microservices across AWS regions requires a solution that balances cost, availability, latency, and operational simplicity. The architecture must provide intelligent traffic routing, health-aware failover, and seamless user experience.
AWS Global Accelerator is a highly available, global service that provides two static IP addresses, which act as a single point of entry to multiple regional endpoints. It intelligently routes user traffic to the nearest healthy endpoint based on network latency, health, and geography. This improves application performance, reduces latency, and ensures high availability even if a region becomes degraded or unavailable.
Combining Global Accelerator with Application Load Balancers (ALBs) in each region provides layer-7 routing to multiple microservices, enabling path- or host-based routing and additional traffic management capabilities. ALBs also provide integrated security features such as TLS termination and Web Application Firewall integration.
Option A with Route 53 latency-based routing lacks the global performance optimization and static IP advantage of Global Accelerator. Option C introduces significant operational complexity and becomes a single point of failure. Option D with CloudFront is primarily designed for caching and static content delivery, not for dynamic microservice traffic distribution and failover.
Therefore, AWS Global Accelerator with regional ALBs ensures highly available, low-latency, and scalable traffic distribution across regions while maintaining simplicity, reliability, and security.
Question 114
Which AWS-native approach provides fine-grained network segmentation and security policy enforcement between different teams’ workloads within a single AWS region while minimizing operational complexity?
A) Use multiple accounts for each team and rely on IAM policies for access control
B) Implement multiple VPCs with VPC peering, combined with separate security groups and NACLs for segmentation
C) Deploy AWS Transit Gateway with multiple route tables for segmentation and integrate AWS Network Firewall for centralized policy enforcement
D) Rely solely on security groups and IAM roles for network segmentation
Answer: C
Explanation:
Fine-grained network segmentation within a single region is critical for multi-team environments where workloads must remain isolated for security, compliance, or operational reasons. The solution should be scalable, centralized, and minimize manual intervention.
AWS Transit Gateway allows multiple VPCs to interconnect via a central hub while maintaining separate route tables for each team or workload, effectively segmenting traffic. This hub-and-spoke model significantly reduces the complexity compared to managing multiple point-to-point VPC peering connections.
Integrating AWS Network Firewall at the Transit Gateway hub provides centralized enforcement of security policies, including stateful traffic inspection, intrusion prevention, and logging. This ensures all traffic between segmented workloads is monitored and controlled without requiring manual configuration in each VPC.
Option A using separate accounts and IAM policies manages identity-based access but does not provide network-level segmentation. Option B with VPC peering and NACLs is operationally cumbersome and scales poorly in large multi-team environments. Option D relying solely on security groups and IAM roles does not enforce segmentation at the network layer and cannot prevent lateral movement effectively.
By combining Transit Gateway route tables with Network Firewall, administrators achieve scalable, centralized, and fine-grained network segmentation while minimizing operational overhead.
Question 115
For an enterprise deploying latency-sensitive, global applications that require consistent performance across regions and resilience against internet congestion, which AWS solution provides the most reliable and secure global connectivity?
A) Configure public-facing Application Load Balancers in all regions and rely on Route 53 latency-based routing
B) Deploy AWS Global Accelerator with static IP addresses and endpoint groups across multiple regions, integrating with TLS for secure connections
C) Use multiple VPN tunnels over the public internet and rely on manual failover between regions
D) Implement VPC peering between regions and manage DNS resolution for cross-region traffic manually
Answer: B
Explanation:
For global, latency-sensitive applications, consistent network performance is critical, particularly under conditions of internet congestion. Traditional internet-based routing is unpredictable due to variable path quality and congestion.
AWS Global Accelerator optimizes traffic routing using the AWS global network backbone rather than relying on public internet paths. By providing static IP addresses, it offers a reliable entry point for clients, reducing DNS-based latency variability. Traffic is automatically routed to the nearest healthy regional endpoint based on latency and health checks, ensuring resilience and performance consistency.
Global Accelerator integrates seamlessly with Application Load Balancers or Network Load Balancers in each region, allowing dynamic traffic management to microservices. TLS encryption ensures secure communication for all traffic without introducing complexity for certificate management.
Option A with public ALBs and Route 53 latency-based routing cannot guarantee performance during internet congestion and lacks static entry IP addresses. Option C’s VPN tunnels are susceptible to public internet variability, creating unreliable performance. Option D’s VPC peering with manual DNS management is operationally complex and not suitable for global-scale applications.
Therefore, AWS Global Accelerator with static IPs, regional endpoints, and TLS encryption provides the most reliable, secure, and consistent global connectivity for latency-sensitive applications.
Question 116
A company wants to enable secure, low-latency access for multiple branch offices to its AWS workloads in different regions without exposing traffic over the public internet. Which architecture provides the most reliable and scalable solution?
A) Deploy Site-to-Site VPN connections from each branch office to all regional VPCs with individual routing policies
B) Use AWS Direct Connect with a single connection to a central location, then attach a Transit Gateway to interconnect all regional VPCs and apply Network Firewall for inspection
C) Configure public internet connections and rely on TLS encryption for all branch office traffic
D) Utilize Client VPN endpoints at each regional VPC to connect branch offices individually
Answer: B
Explanation:
For organizations with multiple branch offices requiring secure, low-latency access to AWS resources across different regions, selecting an architecture that combines performance, scalability, and operational simplicity is critical. Traffic over the public internet introduces variable latency, jitter, and security risks, which can significantly degrade application performance and violate compliance requirements.
AWS Direct Connect provides a dedicated, private network connection between on-premises facilities and AWS, bypassing the public internet. This ensures predictable latency and high throughput. Establishing a single Direct Connect connection to a central location reduces operational overhead while serving as the foundation for a hub-and-spoke network design.
Integrating AWS Transit Gateway into this setup enables centralized management of multiple VPCs across regions. Transit Gateway allows dynamic routing and scalable connectivity between all VPCs, effectively eliminating the need for multiple point-to-point connections. With BGP (Border Gateway Protocol) route propagation, network paths are automatically optimized, improving performance and resilience.
For secure traffic inspection and regulatory compliance, AWS Network Firewall can be deployed at the Transit Gateway hub. This provides stateful packet inspection, intrusion prevention, logging, and filtering, ensuring all branch office traffic adheres to security policies without requiring individual firewall appliances in every VPC.
Option A with individual VPNs is operationally cumbersome and cannot guarantee low-latency connections due to reliance on the internet. Option C exposes sensitive traffic to internet variability, violating security best practices. Option D’s Client VPN solution is intended for individual user access, not for connecting multiple branch offices efficiently.
By combining Direct Connect, Transit Gateway, and Network Firewall, organizations achieve a scalable, secure, low-latency architecture with centralized control, reduced operational complexity, and compliance-ready traffic management. This setup also allows seamless multi-region expansion and redundancy in the event of network failures, ensuring business continuity.
Question 117
An enterprise is designing a multi-region VPC architecture for latency-sensitive applications that must scale globally while ensuring private connectivity and regulatory compliance. Which solution is most appropriate?
A) Establish VPC peering connections across regions and manually configure security groups for each connection
B) Implement AWS Transit Gateway with inter-region peering, centralized route tables, and Network Firewall for security enforcement
C) Use public ALBs in each region and configure Route 53 geo-routing to distribute traffic
D) Deploy EC2-based NAT instances to route traffic between regions and monitor manually
Answer: B
Explanation:
Designing a multi-region VPC architecture for applications that are both latency-sensitive and compliance-critical requires a solution that delivers predictable network performance, private connectivity, and centralized control. Manually managing point-to-point VPC peering is prone to errors, complex to scale, and difficult to enforce consistent security policies.
AWS Transit Gateway provides a hub-and-spoke model that simplifies multi-VPC connectivity. When extended with inter-region peering, it allows private connectivity between VPCs across AWS regions, maintaining consistent low-latency communication without routing traffic over the public internet. This architecture also supports centralized route tables, enabling administrators to define policies at scale and control traffic flows efficiently.
AWS Network Firewall adds a layer of stateful traffic inspection, intrusion detection, and filtering at the Transit Gateway hub. This ensures compliance with strict regulatory frameworks and monitors traffic for potential security threats, without requiring multiple firewalls in each VPC. Traffic logging allows auditing and analysis, which is essential for enterprises with regulatory obligations.
Option A with point-to-point peering becomes exponentially complex as the number of VPCs increases. Option C using public ALBs and Route 53 geo-routing exposes traffic to the internet, introducing latency variability and potential security risks. Option D with NAT instances creates single points of failure, manual scaling challenges, and throughput limitations.
By combining Transit Gateway inter-region peering with Network Firewall, enterprises achieve a scalable, secure, and compliant multi-region network architecture. This solution reduces operational burden while providing consistent performance, which is critical for latency-sensitive applications like real-time analytics, financial transactions, and online gaming platforms.
Question 118
A company is migrating sensitive workloads to AWS and requires encrypted, highly available, low-latency connectivity for cross-region replication between their VPCs. Which design best meets these requirements?
A) Set up multiple VPN tunnels over the internet with IPsec encryption and failover scripts
B) Use AWS Direct Connect with redundant connections, Transit Gateway inter-region peering, and enable encryption using AWS VPN over Direct Connect
C) Deploy EC2-based VPN appliances in each VPC and manually configure routing
D) Use public ALBs with TLS termination for cross-region replication
Answer: B
Explanation:
When migrating sensitive workloads that require cross-region replication, achieving low-latency, highly available, and encrypted connectivity is crucial. Internet-based VPN solutions introduce unpredictable latency and bandwidth limitations, making them less suitable for high-volume replication.
AWS Direct Connect offers dedicated physical connections from on-premises or colocation facilities to AWS, bypassing the public internet. By configuring redundant connections, organizations can achieve high availability and fault tolerance. Direct Connect provides a predictable performance baseline, which is essential for replication workloads where delays or packet loss can impact data consistency.
To connect VPCs across multiple regions efficiently, Transit Gateway inter-region peering is used. This provides private, scalable, low-latency connectivity between regions, eliminating the need for multiple complex point-to-point VPC peering connections. Centralized route tables simplify traffic management and make it easier to enforce security policies at scale.
Even though Direct Connect is private, additional encryption may be required for compliance. AWS VPN over Direct Connect can provide IPsec encryption, ensuring sensitive data remains protected during transit. Integrating Network Firewall or security monitoring at the Transit Gateway further strengthens the security posture and allows logging for compliance purposes.
Option A using multiple VPN tunnels over the public internet cannot guarantee consistent low-latency and high throughput. Option C with EC2-based VPN appliances introduces single points of failure, requires manual scaling, and increases operational complexity. Option D using public ALBs exposes replication traffic to the internet, which is unsuitable for sensitive workloads.
By combining Direct Connect, Transit Gateway inter-region peering, VPN encryption, and Network Firewall, organizations can design a robust, secure, low-latency, and highly available architecture for cross-region workload replication, meeting both performance and compliance requirements.
Question 119
For a large enterprise running multi-tier applications across multiple VPCs and regions, which AWS architecture provides centralized traffic management, security enforcement, and global low-latency performance without requiring complex VPC peering?
A) Deploy multiple VPC peering connections and manually configure NACLs and security groups
B) Implement AWS Transit Gateway for centralized routing, integrate Network Firewall for inspection, and use Global Accelerator for intelligent global traffic distribution
C) Use public ALBs in each region and rely on Route 53 latency-based routing
D) Deploy EC2-based NAT appliances and configure BGP sessions manually between regions
Answer: B
Explanation:
Managing multi-tier applications across multiple VPCs and regions requires a design that centralizes routing, enforces security policies, and optimizes global performance. Traditional VPC peering for multi-region workloads introduces significant complexity and does not scale efficiently.
AWS Transit Gateway provides centralized routing and connectivity across VPCs, allowing administrators to define traffic paths via route tables. This eliminates the need for dozens of individual VPC peering connections, which are difficult to manage at scale and prone to configuration errors. Transit Gateway also supports inter-region peering, enabling private connectivity across regions.
Integrating AWS Network Firewall at the Transit Gateway hub provides stateful traffic inspection, intrusion detection, and logging for all traffic, ensuring regulatory compliance and enhancing security posture. Centralized firewall deployment reduces operational complexity and ensures consistent enforcement of security policies across VPCs.
For global, latency-sensitive applications, AWS Global Accelerator provides static IP addresses, intelligent routing based on client location and endpoint health, and optimized paths over the AWS global network. This significantly improves user experience and reduces reliance on public internet routes, which are subject to congestion and latency variability.
Option A with multiple VPC peering connections is complex to scale and maintain, and NACLs and security groups alone cannot centralize policy enforcement effectively. Option C using public ALBs exposes traffic to internet variability and lacks global performance optimization. Option D with EC2 NAT appliances introduces operational overhead, single points of failure, and limited throughput.
By combining Transit Gateway, Network Firewall, and Global Accelerator, enterprises achieve a centralized, secure, scalable, and high-performance architecture, capable of supporting global applications with consistent low-latency and simplified operational management.
Question 120
A multinational organization requires end-to-end private connectivity for its SaaS application across multiple AWS regions while minimizing latency and maintaining centralized security controls. Which architecture is most suitable?
A) Configure Site-to-Site VPNs for each region and rely on manual routing and security group enforcement
B) Use AWS Direct Connect with redundant links, Transit Gateway with inter-region peering, and Network Firewall to enforce centralized policies
C) Deploy public-facing ALBs in all regions and rely on Route 53 weighted routing
D) Utilize EC2-based VPN appliances to connect regions and manually configure BGP routes
Answer: B
Explanation:
For a multinational SaaS application, achieving end-to-end private connectivity with low latency and centralized security requires a combination of high-performance networking, centralized routing, and policy enforcement. Public internet paths are unreliable for enterprise workloads due to unpredictable latency, jitter, and potential security exposure.
AWS Direct Connect provides dedicated, high-throughput, low-latency connections between on-premises or colocation facilities and AWS. Deploying redundant Direct Connect links ensures high availability and resilience, meeting enterprise SLAs for performance and uptime.
Transit Gateway inter-region peering enables private connectivity between VPCs across regions, avoiding the public internet entirely. Transit Gateway also supports centralized route tables, simplifying management of traffic flows and enabling consistent segmentation policies across regions. This hub-and-spoke model scales efficiently, removing the complexity of managing numerous point-to-point connections.
AWS Network Firewall integration provides centralized inspection, stateful packet filtering, and logging, enforcing security and compliance across the entire architecture. Traffic between regions is inspected and monitored without requiring multiple firewalls in each VPC, reducing operational overhead and simplifying compliance audits.
Option A with multiple VPNs introduces high latency, variable performance, and operational complexity. Option C using public ALBs exposes traffic to the internet, reducing reliability and security. Option D with EC2-based VPN appliances introduces single points of failure, throughput limits, and manual management overhead.
By combining Direct Connect, Transit Gateway inter-region peering, and Network Firewall, organizations achieve a scalable, secure, low-latency architecture that ensures private connectivity, centralized policy enforcement, and high performance for global SaaS workloads.
