Visit here for our full Amazon AWS Certified Advanced Networking – Specialty ANS-C01 exam dumps and practice test questions.
Question 161
You are designing a multi-region architecture on AWS for a latency-sensitive application that requires high availability and low recovery point objectives (RPO). Which approach should you implement to achieve these goals?
A) Deploy the application in a single AWS region with multiple Availability Zones and use Amazon S3 cross-region replication for backups.
B) Deploy the application across multiple AWS regions with active-active load balancing and configure Amazon Route 53 latency-based routing.
C) Deploy the application in multiple Availability Zones in one region and use Amazon CloudFront to distribute traffic globally.
D) Deploy the application in a single Availability Zone and use EBS snapshots to recover in case of failure.
Answer: B
Explanation:
For latency-sensitive applications that require high availability and minimal RPO, it is crucial to consider multi-region deployments. Option A), while providing multiple Availability Zones and using Amazon S3 cross-region replication, only offers data replication for storage but does not address application-level failover across regions. This might reduce downtime in a single region failure but cannot ensure the lowest possible latency for global users. Option C) utilizes multiple Availability Zones within a single region and relies on Amazon CloudFront for content delivery. CloudFront helps with caching static content globally but does not reduce latency for dynamic application interactions that require real-time processing. Option D), deploying in a single Availability Zone with EBS snapshots, exposes the application to a single point of failure, making it unsuitable for high availability and disaster recovery objectives. Option B) is the most effective strategy as it employs multi-region active-active deployment with Amazon Route 53 latency-based routing, ensuring traffic is directed to the closest available region to minimize latency. Active-active deployments across regions provide redundancy, allow for faster failover, and maintain low RPO by synchronizing critical data in near real-time across regions. This approach also enables the application to continue operating even if an entire AWS region becomes unavailable. Additional considerations include ensuring database replication is properly configured, potentially leveraging services like Amazon Aurora Global Database or DynamoDB Global Tables to synchronize state across regions. Implementing cross-region VPC peering or transit gateways may also be necessary to ensure low-latency connectivity between regional components. Overall, a multi-region active-active architecture is the recommended pattern for latency-sensitive applications requiring both high availability and minimal RPO, as it mitigates the risks associated with regional outages and ensures optimal end-user experience globally.
Question 162
You need to design a network architecture where multiple on-premises sites connect to AWS using private, encrypted connections with minimal latency and highly resilient design. Which AWS service combination is most suitable?
A) AWS Direct Connect with redundant connections and VPN failover.
B) Amazon VPC peering between regions with IPSec encryption.
C) AWS Transit Gateway with single VPN connection per site.
D) Site-to-Site VPN connections from each on-premises site directly to individual VPCs.
Answer: A
Explanation:
For connecting multiple on-premises sites to AWS with high resilience, low latency, and encrypted private connections, the architecture must balance performance, security, and fault tolerance. Option B), Amazon VPC peering across regions, is primarily designed for VPC-to-VPC communication within AWS, and while it can provide encrypted communication using VPN over peering, it does not directly address multi-site on-premises connectivity. Option C), AWS Transit Gateway with a single VPN connection, does simplify management but a single VPN connection creates a potential single point of failure. For high availability, redundant paths are necessary. Option D), establishing Site-to-Site VPN connections directly to individual VPCs from each site, increases complexity and management overhead and might not deliver optimal performance due to the reliance solely on public internet VPNs. Option A), deploying AWS Direct Connect with redundant connections and VPN failover, provides dedicated, high-bandwidth, low-latency connectivity to AWS. Redundant Direct Connect connections ensure that if one connection fails, the secondary connection can maintain connectivity. Additionally, VPN over Direct Connect provides encryption for data in transit, meeting security requirements. Implementing multiple Direct Connect locations and leveraging AWS Direct Connect gateway enables centralized connectivity from multiple on-premises sites to multiple AWS regions. This setup enhances both resiliency and latency optimization, while supporting bandwidth-intensive workloads. For enhanced network security, BGP configurations with proper route advertisement policies should be applied to manage failover and routing efficiently. This design ensures a scalable, resilient, and secure hybrid network architecture, meeting the stringent requirements of enterprise-grade connectivity while providing low-latency access to AWS services.
Question 163
Your company wants to centralize VPC connectivity and reduce peering complexity across 20 VPCs in multiple AWS regions. Which design pattern is the most efficient and scalable solution?
A) Create VPC peering connections between every VPC in a full mesh configuration.
B) Use an AWS Transit Gateway in each region and connect them via inter-region peering.
C) Deploy VPN connections from each VPC to a central VPC.
D) Implement Amazon CloudFront to route traffic between VPCs.
Answer: B
Explanation:
Centralizing connectivity for multiple VPCs across different regions requires an architecture that is scalable, manageable, and cost-effective. Option A), using full mesh VPC peering, is impractical at scale. With 20 VPCs, a full mesh would require 190 peering connections, which becomes operationally complex and difficult to maintain. Option C), deploying VPN connections from each VPC to a central VPC, also introduces significant management overhead and is less efficient in terms of latency and bandwidth. VPN connections over the internet may also suffer from variable performance. Option D), leveraging Amazon CloudFront, is intended for content delivery rather than inter-VPC connectivity, making it unsuitable for general network traffic between VPCs. Option B), deploying AWS Transit Gateway (TGW) in each region and establishing inter-region peering between them, provides a highly scalable and efficient design. Transit Gateway centralizes VPC connectivity, simplifying management and reducing the number of required connections. Inter-region peering allows TGWs in different regions to communicate, enabling seamless routing between VPCs across regions. This design reduces the number of network paths, lowers operational complexity, and improves bandwidth utilization. TGWs support route tables for fine-grained traffic segmentation, enabling traffic isolation and security controls. Combined with centralized monitoring, flow logs, and proper route propagation, this pattern is the recommended solution for enterprises seeking to manage multi-VPC, multi-region connectivity efficiently. Using Transit Gateway also ensures future scalability as more VPCs or regions are added without exponential growth in configuration complexity.
Question 164
You are tasked with designing a solution where thousands of IoT devices connect securely to AWS and data is ingested reliably without overloading backend services. Which architecture best meets these requirements?
A) Devices connect directly to an Amazon EC2 cluster using HTTPS endpoints.
B) Devices send data to Amazon Kinesis Data Streams via AWS IoT Core.
C) Devices use Amazon S3 PUT requests directly for each event.
D) Devices connect via Site-to-Site VPN to send messages to on-premises servers.
Answer: B
Explanation:
Managing thousands of IoT devices requires secure ingestion, scalability, and reliable data streaming. Option A), direct connection to EC2 clusters, is not scalable. Thousands of concurrent HTTPS connections can overwhelm servers and increase management complexity for certificates, security patches, and high availability. Option C), sending events directly to Amazon S3, may be inefficient because S3 is optimized for object storage rather than streaming ingestion of high-frequency IoT data. Additionally, each request is treated as a separate PUT operation, potentially causing performance bottlenecks. Option D), connecting devices over Site-to-Site VPN to on-premises servers, introduces high latency, bandwidth constraints, and dependency on on-premises infrastructure, making it unsuitable for large-scale IoT scenarios. Option B), sending data to Amazon Kinesis Data Streams via AWS IoT Core, provides an optimal architecture for IoT device ingestion. AWS IoT Core offers secure device authentication using X.509 certificates or AWS IoT policies. It allows devices to publish messages reliably using MQTT, HTTPS, or WebSockets. Kinesis Data Streams then enables real-time ingestion, buffering, and processing at scale without overloading backend services. It integrates seamlessly with AWS Lambda, Amazon S3, Amazon Redshift, or Amazon DynamoDB, providing near real-time analytics and storage. Additionally, Kinesis provides shard scaling, allowing the system to handle spikes in device traffic while maintaining data integrity and order. Leveraging AWS IoT Core and Kinesis ensures high availability, fault tolerance, and seamless scaling, which are essential for large-scale IoT deployments that demand secure, reliable, and performant ingestion pipelines. This architecture also allows for future integration with analytics pipelines and machine learning services to derive insights from IoT data efficiently.
Question 165
Your company needs to implement a highly available network architecture for a global application with low latency, secure connections, and centralized traffic management. Which combination of AWS services should you use?
A) AWS Global Accelerator with Amazon CloudFront and multiple regional VPCs.
B) Amazon Route 53 with latency-based routing and multiple EC2 instances in a single region.
C) AWS Site-to-Site VPN with a single regional deployment.
D) Amazon CloudFront only with S3 as backend storage.
Answer: A
Explanation:
For a global application requiring low latency, high availability, and secure centralized traffic management, a solution must optimize both network performance and availability. Option B), Route 53 with latency-based routing, helps reduce latency but having multiple EC2 instances in a single region introduces a single point of failure. This design cannot achieve true high availability across global regions. Option C), using Site-to-Site VPN with a single regional deployment, focuses on private network connections but does not address global low-latency traffic or traffic distribution. Option D), CloudFront with S3, provides content caching but is limited to static or cached content and does not manage dynamic application traffic or centralized routing. Option A), combining AWS Global Accelerator, Amazon CloudFront, and multiple regional VPCs, is the most comprehensive solution. Global Accelerator provides a single static IP address or two IPs per accelerator that route user traffic to the nearest healthy regional endpoint using the AWS global network, significantly reducing latency and improving fault tolerance. CloudFront complements this by caching static and dynamic content at edge locations globally, improving performance for frequently accessed content. Multiple regional VPCs ensure regional isolation, redundancy, and high availability for backend applications. Together, these services provide a scalable, secure, and highly available global network architecture with centralized traffic management, automatic failover, and optimized latency for end users. By integrating TLS encryption, WAF, and IAM policies, the architecture also meets stringent security requirements, making it ideal for enterprise-grade global applications.
Question 166
Your organization wants to create a hybrid network that allows on-premises workloads to access multiple AWS VPCs in different regions with minimal latency and centralized management. Which architecture is the most scalable and efficient solution?
A) Deploy Site-to-Site VPN connections from each on-premises location directly to each VPC in every region.
B) Use AWS Direct Connect with a Direct Connect Gateway connected to AWS Transit Gateways in each region.
C) Configure VPC peering between all VPCs and use on-premises VPN connections to a single VPC.
D) Deploy Amazon CloudFront to route traffic from on-premises to multiple VPCs.
Answer: B
Explanation:
Designing a hybrid network to connect on-premises environments to multiple AWS VPCs across regions requires consideration of scalability, low latency, and centralized management. Option A), direct Site-to-Site VPN connections from each location to every VPC, would quickly become unmanageable as the number of VPCs and regions grows. This approach also suffers from higher latency because VPN connections traverse the public internet and cannot scale efficiently for high-throughput workloads. Option C), using VPC peering between all VPCs and connecting on-premises to a single VPC, creates a full-mesh network topology which scales poorly. Each additional VPC increases the number of peering connections exponentially, making route management complex and difficult to maintain. Option D), relying on Amazon CloudFront, is suitable primarily for content delivery and caching static or dynamic content at edge locations, but it does not provide a fully managed, low-latency path for real-time workloads or private connectivity. Option B), combining AWS Direct Connect with Direct Connect Gateway and AWS Transit Gateway (TGW), offers a highly scalable, low-latency architecture. Direct Connect provides private, high-bandwidth connections between on-premises networks and AWS. By connecting through a Direct Connect Gateway, a single physical Direct Connect connection can reach multiple Transit Gateways across regions, eliminating the need for multiple connections per region. Transit Gateways centralize VPC connectivity within a region, simplify routing, and allow for segmentation using route tables for traffic management. Additionally, inter-region Transit Gateway peering allows on-premises workloads to access VPCs in different AWS regions seamlessly, providing high performance and redundancy. This architecture is highly resilient because Direct Connect supports redundant connections and failover to VPN connections in case of outage. Using Transit Gateway also enables centralized monitoring, flow logging, and policy-based routing, which are essential for large-scale enterprise networks. Overall, this solution provides a robust, efficient, and highly manageable hybrid network architecture suitable for global enterprises connecting multiple regions and VPCs while minimizing latency and complexity.
Question 167
A global company wants to implement a secure multi-region architecture for their web application that ensures low latency for end-users and seamless failover in case of regional outages. Which combination of AWS services should they implement?
A) Amazon Route 53 with weighted routing, CloudFront for caching, and multiple regional VPC deployments.
B) AWS Global Accelerator with multiple regional Application Load Balancers and Amazon Route 53 for DNS failover.
C) Single-region EC2 deployment with Route 53 latency-based routing.
D) Multi-AZ VPC deployment with VPN failover to a second region.
Answer: B
Explanation:
Global applications with strict latency, availability, and failover requirements must leverage AWS services designed for low-latency global traffic routing and automatic regional failover. Option A), Route 53 weighted routing with CloudFront, provides some ability to distribute traffic between regions, but weighted routing requires manual adjustments to traffic distribution. CloudFront improves static content delivery but does not optimize dynamic application traffic, which can still experience latency. Option C), a single-region EC2 deployment with latency-based routing, fails to provide true regional redundancy. A failure in that region would make the application unavailable globally. Option D), a multi-AZ deployment with VPN failover, addresses high availability within a region but does not efficiently distribute global traffic or reduce latency for users far from the region. Option B), combining AWS Global Accelerator with regional Application Load Balancers (ALBs) and Route 53 for DNS failover, provides an optimal solution. AWS Global Accelerator offers static IP addresses that automatically route user traffic to the closest healthy regional endpoint using the AWS global network, significantly reducing latency. Multiple regional ALBs ensure high availability within each region, managing incoming traffic efficiently and distributing it to healthy EC2 instances or ECS services. Route 53 can be configured for failover DNS, providing a secondary layer of resiliency in case of a complete regional failure. This combination ensures fast, secure, and highly available global application delivery, reduces latency for end-users regardless of location, and provides seamless failover in multi-region architectures. For additional optimization, TLS termination at the ALBs, integration with WAF, and logging via CloudWatch or S3 improve both security and observability. This architecture is particularly suitable for dynamic web applications requiring high performance, global reach, and near-zero downtime.
Question 168
You need to implement a highly available, low-latency data replication solution across AWS regions for a critical database. Which design pattern is the most effective and cost-efficient for achieving near real-time replication?
A) Deploy Amazon RDS in one region and replicate backups to S3 in a second region.
B) Use Amazon Aurora Global Database with read and write endpoints in multiple regions.
C) Configure VPC peering between regions and replicate database changes over EC2 instances.
D) Use AWS DataSync to move daily database snapshots between regions.
Answer: B
Explanation:
For critical applications that demand high availability, low latency, and near real-time replication of data across regions, the choice of database architecture is crucial. Option A), replicating RDS backups to S3, only provides asynchronous backup-level replication. While useful for disaster recovery, this method cannot support near real-time read/write operations, and recovery may take significant time, leading to high RPO and RTO. Option C), replicating database changes manually over EC2 instances via VPC peering, introduces complexity, latency, and management overhead. It also lacks built-in failover and scaling mechanisms. Option D), using AWS DataSync to transfer snapshots daily, is suitable for batch-based replication, not real-time operations, and would fail to meet low RPO requirements. Option B), deploying Amazon Aurora Global Database, is the most efficient approach. Aurora Global Database allows a single primary writer region with read replicas in multiple secondary regions. Replication occurs using physical storage-based replication, achieving typical latency of under a second, suitable for near real-time applications. This architecture allows read scaling across regions while maintaining a single authoritative write source, simplifying conflict resolution and operational complexity. Failover can be manually initiated or automated using Route 53 health checks and DNS updates, providing rapid disaster recovery. Aurora’s managed infrastructure also handles replication, failover, and backups automatically, reducing operational overhead and minimizing costs compared to building a custom replication solution. With proper security controls, such as KMS encryption, IAM policies, and VPC isolation, data integrity and privacy are maintained. Additionally, Aurora Global Database is ideal for globally distributed applications, such as e-commerce platforms or SaaS products, requiring minimal latency for read operations worldwide while ensuring business continuity in case of regional outages.
Question 169
Your company requires a secure, low-latency, and highly available architecture for cross-region application traffic. Which AWS service and configuration combination is most appropriate?
A) Amazon Route 53 with failover routing to multiple EC2 instances in different regions.
B) AWS Global Accelerator with multiple regional Application Load Balancers and TLS termination.
C) AWS Site-to-Site VPN connections between regions with BGP routing.
D) CloudFront with single-region S3 bucket backend.
Answer: B
Explanation:
Cross-region application traffic requires optimized routing, low latency, high availability, and secure connectivity. Option A), Route 53 failover routing, only provides DNS-level routing and cannot optimize latency for dynamic traffic. It does not manage TLS termination or health-aware routing in real time and relies on the client DNS resolver, which may introduce additional delays. Option C), using Site-to-Site VPN connections across regions, is unsuitable for public-facing applications because it introduces high latency and dependency on internet or Direct Connect routing between regions. Option D), CloudFront with a single-region S3 backend, is suitable only for static content and cannot handle dynamic application traffic effectively. Option B), combining AWS Global Accelerator with multiple regional ALBs and TLS termination, addresses all key requirements. Global Accelerator provides static IP addresses for the application, routes users to the closest healthy regional ALB using AWS global network paths, significantly reducing latency and improving performance. TLS termination at the ALBs ensures encrypted traffic while offloading the SSL decryption burden from backend servers, enhancing efficiency. Multiple ALBs across regions provide regional redundancy and load balancing, ensuring high availability and failover capabilities. Health checks and automatic traffic rerouting further enhance resilience. This architecture is fully managed, scalable, and optimized for both performance and security, making it suitable for enterprise-grade, globally distributed applications. Integrating CloudWatch monitoring, WAF policies, and IAM roles further strengthens security and operational observability. This solution is recommended for dynamic web applications or APIs that must respond quickly to global user requests while maintaining strict uptime and security standards.
Question 170
You are designing a multi-region network architecture for a latency-sensitive application. The architecture must provide secure connectivity, centralized routing, and minimal management overhead. Which design approach is most suitable?
A) Deploy multiple Site-to-Site VPN connections from each region to a central on-premises network.
B) Implement AWS Transit Gateway in each region with inter-region peering and connect to Direct Connect Gateway.
C) Use VPC peering between all regional VPCs and configure static routes.
D) Deploy CloudFront with S3 replication to all regions for data transfer.
Answer: B
Explanation:
For latency-sensitive applications deployed across multiple regions, the network architecture must minimize delays, centralize routing, and maintain security while reducing operational complexity. Option A), relying on Site-to-Site VPN connections to a central on-premises network, introduces unnecessary latency, dependency on on-premises infrastructure, and high management overhead, making it unsuitable for global, high-performance applications. Option C), VPC peering across regions with static routes, scales poorly as the number of regions increases because the number of peering connections grows exponentially. Route management becomes cumbersome, and dynamic failover capabilities are limited. Option D), CloudFront with S3 replication, is effective for delivering static content globally but does not support dynamic traffic routing or centralized network management for applications requiring real-time interaction. Option B), using AWS Transit Gateway in each region with inter-region peering, provides a scalable, low-latency backbone for centralized routing between VPCs. Connecting Transit Gateways to a Direct Connect Gateway ensures secure, private access from on-premises networks to AWS, supporting hybrid architectures. Transit Gateway simplifies route propagation, segmentation, and network monitoring, drastically reducing operational overhead compared to managing multiple peering connections or VPNs. Inter-region peering allows traffic to travel across AWS’s optimized global backbone, minimizing latency compared to public internet paths. This architecture provides both high availability and scalability, enabling enterprises to add new regions or VPCs without exponentially increasing complexity. Security is enhanced through VPC isolation, IAM policies, and traffic inspection, while centralized routing ensures predictable, reliable connectivity across the global network. This solution represents the best practice for multi-region, low-latency, secure network design, making it ideal for globally distributed, latency-sensitive workloads.
Question 171
Your company operates multiple AWS accounts across different regions and wants to implement centralized network management with minimal administrative overhead. Which solution best achieves this goal?
A) Use AWS Organizations to manage VPC peering connections manually between accounts.
B) Deploy AWS Transit Gateway with a hub-and-spoke model connecting all VPCs across accounts and regions.
C) Configure Site-to-Site VPN connections from each account to a central on-premises network.
D) Use Amazon Route 53 private hosted zones for DNS resolution between accounts.
Answer: B
Explanation:
Centralized network management across multiple AWS accounts and regions requires a scalable, secure, and low-overhead architecture. Option A), using AWS Organizations to manage VPC peering, only simplifies account-level billing and policy management but does not inherently provide network connectivity. Managing individual VPC peering connections between all accounts and regions is cumbersome, does not scale well, and increases the potential for routing errors as the network grows. Option C), deploying Site-to-Site VPN connections from each account to a central on-premises network, creates unnecessary latency and complexity. It ties the architecture to on-premises infrastructure and fails to optimize connectivity between AWS VPCs directly. Option D), using Route 53 private hosted zones, only addresses DNS resolution between VPCs. It does not provide centralized routing, traffic management, or high-throughput connectivity required for enterprise workloads. Option B), deploying AWS Transit Gateway in a hub-and-spoke model, is the most effective solution. Transit Gateway acts as a central hub for VPCs and on-premises networks, consolidating routing policies and simplifying management. By attaching all VPCs across accounts and regions to a central Transit Gateway, administrators can propagate routes automatically, reducing the need for manual route configuration. Inter-region Transit Gateway peering allows traffic to traverse AWS’s private backbone, reducing latency and improving reliability. This architecture supports segmentation using route tables, ensuring security and compliance across accounts. Additionally, combining Transit Gateway with Direct Connect Gateway provides private, high-bandwidth connectivity from on-premises environments to all AWS resources, eliminating the dependency on VPNs. Features like flow logs, centralized monitoring, and automated failover further enhance visibility and operational efficiency. This architecture is ideal for enterprises with multiple accounts, providing scalable network management, centralized routing, and secure connectivity across regions without introducing complex meshes of peering connections or multiple VPNs. Implementing Transit Gateway ensures that adding new accounts or regions in the future is seamless, reducing long-term operational costs while maintaining high performance and security.
Question 172
You are tasked with designing a global application that requires low-latency access for users and high availability across multiple AWS regions. Which architecture meets these requirements most effectively?
A) Single-region deployment with Route 53 latency-based routing.
B) Multi-region deployment with AWS Global Accelerator, Application Load Balancers, and health-checked endpoints.
C) Multi-AZ deployment in one region with CloudFront for caching static content.
D) Regional deployments connected via Site-to-Site VPN and Route 53 failover routing.
Answer: B
Explanation:
Designing a global application for low latency and high availability requires an architecture that can dynamically route traffic to the closest available region while providing resiliency in case of failures. Option A), deploying in a single region with Route 53 latency-based routing, reduces latency for some users but does not provide true regional redundancy. Failover across regions would be slow, and dynamic traffic routing may not be optimized. Option C), using a multi-AZ deployment in a single region combined with CloudFront, only optimizes static content delivery. Dynamic content and database requests would still face latency issues for geographically distant users. Option D), connecting regional deployments via Site-to-Site VPN, introduces latency because traffic must traverse public internet or dedicated links, which increases complexity and maintenance overhead. Option B), combining AWS Global Accelerator with multiple Application Load Balancers and health-checked endpoints, provides an optimal solution. Global Accelerator provides static IP addresses and uses the AWS global network to route traffic to the nearest healthy regional endpoint automatically, significantly reducing latency. Multiple regional ALBs ensure application-level load balancing, supporting both dynamic and static content while enabling TLS termination to offload encryption workloads from backend servers. Health checks and automated routing provide high availability, ensuring that traffic is redirected if a regional deployment becomes unhealthy. This architecture also integrates seamlessly with Amazon CloudWatch, WAF, and security groups, providing observability and protection against threats. Using Global Accelerator with regional ALBs eliminates the need for complex DNS-based failover strategies, offering near-instant traffic rerouting while maintaining a consistent user experience globally. The architecture is highly scalable, enabling organizations to add new regions or endpoints without extensive reconfiguration. Overall, this solution achieves low-latency performance, high availability, secure connectivity, and simplified management for globally distributed applications, making it ideal for modern enterprise workloads.
Question 173
A company wants to implement near real-time replication of a mission-critical database across AWS regions to support global read access and disaster recovery. Which solution is most appropriate?
A) Daily snapshots of RDS replicated to S3 in another region.
B) AWS DataSync to copy database files across regions hourly.
C) Amazon Aurora Global Database with read replicas in multiple regions.
D) VPC peering with EC2 instances running database replication scripts.
Answer: C
Explanation:
Ensuring near real-time replication of critical databases across regions requires a solution that supports low-latency replication, global read scalability, and automated failover. Option A), daily RDS snapshots to S3, only supports asynchronous, batch-level replication. This approach introduces high recovery point objectives (RPO) and is unsuitable for workloads requiring near real-time access. Option B), using AWS DataSync to copy database files hourly, also operates on a batch schedule, which cannot meet near real-time requirements and would not scale efficiently with high transaction volumes. Option D), configuring VPC peering with EC2 instances running custom replication scripts, introduces operational complexity, high latency, and maintenance overhead. It also lacks automated failover mechanisms, which increases the risk of downtime during regional outages. Option C), deploying Amazon Aurora Global Database, is designed specifically for multi-region, low-latency replication. Aurora Global Database maintains a primary writer region while replicating data to read-only replicas in secondary regions with typical latency measured in less than a second. This architecture allows global users to access read replicas locally, reducing latency and improving application performance. Aurora handles replication, backups, failover, and monitoring automatically, reducing operational overhead. In case of a regional failure, a failover to a secondary region can be initiated quickly using Route 53 health checks and DNS updates, providing disaster recovery with minimal downtime. Security features such as KMS encryption, IAM policies, VPC isolation, and security groups ensure that data is protected across regions. Aurora’s integration with CloudWatch and Enhanced Monitoring allows administrators to track replication latency and performance metrics in real time. Overall, Aurora Global Database provides the most efficient, scalable, and resilient solution for multi-region replication of critical databases, supporting both high availability and global performance without the complexity of custom replication solutions.
Question 174
A company wants to connect multiple on-premises sites to AWS while ensuring low latency, high throughput, and centralized routing. Which architecture provides the best solution?
A) Site-to-Site VPN connections from each site to each VPC.
B) AWS Direct Connect connections from each site to a Direct Connect Gateway attached to Transit Gateways in each region.
C) VPC peering between all regional VPCs and VPN connections to on-premises sites.
D) CloudFront distribution with on-premises network endpoints.
Answer: B
Explanation:
Connecting multiple on-premises sites to AWS requires an architecture that provides high performance, centralized routing, and low operational complexity. Option A), establishing VPN connections from each site to every VPC, is not scalable. Each additional VPC or site requires a new VPN connection, increasing latency and management complexity. VPNs also traverse the public internet, introducing variability in throughput and performance. Option C), using VPC peering between all regional VPCs and connecting on-premises sites via VPN, creates a mesh network that grows exponentially in complexity and is difficult to manage, while still relying on slower VPN connectivity. Option D), CloudFront, is designed for content delivery optimization, particularly for static content, and does not provide low-latency, secure connectivity for real-time, private application workloads. Option B), deploying AWS Direct Connect from each on-premises site to a Direct Connect Gateway, which is then connected to Transit Gateways in each region, is the most effective approach. Direct Connect provides private, high-bandwidth connections, minimizing latency and improving throughput. Transit Gateways serve as a centralized hub, enabling simplified routing between multiple VPCs and on-premises networks while supporting inter-region peering. This architecture reduces the number of required connections, centralizes route management, and provides resilience by allowing failover to backup Direct Connect or VPN connections if needed. Using Transit Gateway route tables, administrators can segment networks securely and propagate routes automatically, further reducing operational overhead. Centralized monitoring via CloudWatch, network flow logs, and integration with IAM policies provides complete visibility and security. This solution scales efficiently as new sites or regions are added, offering a future-proof architecture for enterprises requiring low-latency, high-throughput connectivity between multiple on-premises locations and AWS.
Question 175
A global enterprise requires a multi-region architecture for a latency-sensitive application. The architecture must provide secure connectivity, centralized management, and minimal operational complexity. Which AWS design pattern should be implemented?
A) Site-to-Site VPN connections between regions with static routing.
B) AWS Transit Gateway in each region with inter-region peering and Direct Connect Gateway for centralized connectivity.
C) VPC peering between all regional VPCs with VPN connections to central on-premises network.
D) CloudFront with S3 replication across all regions.
Answer: B
Explanation:
For a multi-region, latency-sensitive application, the network must provide low-latency routing, centralized management, secure connectivity, and scalability. Option A), using Site-to-Site VPN connections between regions with static routes, introduces high latency, complexity, and limited failover options. VPNs rely on the public internet, which may result in variable performance and degraded application experience. Option C), deploying VPC peering between all regional VPCs with VPNs to on-premises, creates a complex full-mesh architecture that does not scale efficiently. Route management becomes cumbersome, and operational overhead increases as regions and VPCs expand. Option D), using CloudFront with S3 replication, is optimized for static content delivery, but it does not address dynamic application traffic or centralized routing and cannot handle real-time, secure traffic between regions. Option B), using AWS Transit Gateway in each region with inter-region peering and Direct Connect Gateway, provides the optimal solution. Transit Gateways act as centralized routing hubs for VPCs in each region. Inter-region peering allows traffic to traverse the AWS global network, minimizing latency and improving performance. Connecting Transit Gateways to a Direct Connect Gateway provides secure, high-throughput access to on-premises networks from all regions, centralizing connectivity management and reducing operational complexity. Transit Gateway also supports route table segmentation, flow logging, and VPC attachment automation, simplifying network operations while maintaining robust security. This design scales efficiently as new regions, VPCs, or on-premises sites are added, providing a highly resilient, low-latency, secure, and manageable global network architecture suitable for enterprise-grade applications. It also allows integration with monitoring, security policies, and automated failover mechanisms, ensuring global availability and consistent performance.
Question 176
A company is designing a hybrid network architecture where multiple on-premises data centers need to securely connect to several AWS regions with consistent low-latency performance. Which solution ensures centralized network management and optimized inter-region traffic?
A) Establish Site-to-Site VPN connections from each data center to individual VPCs in each region.
B) Use AWS Transit Gateway in each region, connect them via inter-region peering, and attach a Direct Connect Gateway to centralize on-premises connectivity.
C) Use VPC peering between all regional VPCs and manage multiple VPNs for each on-premises site.
D) Deploy CloudFront for dynamic content delivery from all AWS regions.
Answer: B
Explanation:
Designing a hybrid architecture for multiple on-premises sites and multiple AWS regions requires a solution that optimizes latency, throughput, centralized management, and scalability. Option A), establishing individual VPNs from each data center to every VPC, is operationally cumbersome. Each new region or VPC would require additional VPN configurations, creating a complex mesh network that is difficult to maintain and prone to configuration errors. VPNs also traverse the public internet, which introduces variable latency and inconsistent throughput, making them unsuitable for latency-sensitive workloads. Option C), using VPC peering between all regional VPCs and multiple VPNs for on-premises connectivity, also introduces complexity and operational overhead. Full-mesh VPC peering scales poorly and complicates routing, while managing numerous VPN connections further increases administrative burden. Option D), deploying CloudFront, is primarily optimized for static and cached content delivery. CloudFront cannot provide secure, low-latency, high-throughput connectivity for private application workloads or real-time hybrid networking requirements. Option B), using AWS Transit Gateway in each region and connecting them through inter-region peering, provides the most efficient architecture. Transit Gateway acts as a centralized routing hub for all VPCs in each region, reducing the number of route tables and simplifying management. Inter-region peering allows traffic to traverse AWS’s private backbone network, which minimizes latency and avoids public internet variability. Connecting a Direct Connect Gateway to the Transit Gateways centralizes on-premises connectivity, providing a dedicated, high-throughput, low-latency connection from data centers to all AWS regions. This architecture also supports route propagation, which automatically updates routing tables across all attachments, reducing manual configuration. Administrators can segment traffic securely using multiple route tables and attachment policies, ensuring compliance and isolation between different business units or applications. Integration with CloudWatch, flow logs, and monitoring dashboards ensures observability and operational oversight. Overall, this architecture balances performance, security, scalability, and manageability, making it ideal for enterprises requiring hybrid multi-region network connectivity for latency-sensitive workloads.
Question 177
You are tasked with designing a secure, high-throughput network for an application that requires communication between multiple VPCs in different AWS regions and direct access from on-premises networks. Which architecture meets these requirements while minimizing operational overhead?
A) VPC peering for each VPC pair, with separate VPN connections from on-premises to each VPC.
B) AWS Transit Gateway in each region, connected via inter-region peering, with a Direct Connect Gateway for on-premises connectivity.
C) AWS Site-to-Site VPN connections between each region’s VPC and on-premises networks with static routing.
D) Use CloudFront for all traffic, combined with S3 replication for static content.
Answer: B
Explanation:
Designing a multi-region, high-throughput, secure network requires an architecture that provides centralized routing, automated failover, and minimal administrative effort. Option A), using VPC peering between all VPCs, creates a full-mesh network, which is difficult to scale and manage. Each additional VPC increases the number of required peering connections exponentially, increasing complexity and the risk of routing errors. Separate VPNs from on-premises networks further complicate management and introduce latency and throughput limitations because VPN traffic traverses the public internet. Option C), relying on multiple Site-to-Site VPN connections with static routing, similarly suffers from operational complexity, limited throughput, and variable latency. VPNs do not scale well for multi-region deployments and require manual intervention to update routes or maintain failover mechanisms. Option D), CloudFront with S3 replication, is optimized for static content delivery and caching but is not suitable for real-time, private communication between VPCs or direct access from on-premises networks. Option B), deploying AWS Transit Gateway in each region and connecting them via inter-region peering, offers the most efficient solution. Transit Gateway acts as a centralized routing hub, allowing VPCs to communicate securely without the complexity of full-mesh peering. Inter-region peering leverages AWS’s private backbone network, reducing latency and ensuring reliable high-throughput connectivity. Connecting a Direct Connect Gateway to Transit Gateways provides a dedicated, low-latency link for on-premises networks, avoiding public internet variability. Route propagation between Transit Gateway attachments simplifies network management and automatically updates routing tables across regions. Additionally, administrators can enforce segmentation and isolation using multiple route tables, control access using security groups and IAM policies, and monitor traffic using flow logs and CloudWatch. This architecture provides scalability, resilience, and operational simplicity, allowing enterprises to add new VPCs or regions with minimal reconfiguration. Centralized management reduces administrative effort and provides a consistent, secure networking framework suitable for high-performance, latency-sensitive applications with hybrid access requirements.
Question 178
A company wants to ensure their multi-region web application provides low-latency access, automatic failover, and secure traffic routing for users worldwide. Which solution should be implemented?
A) Single-region deployment with CloudFront caching and Route 53 weighted routing.
B) Multi-region deployment with Application Load Balancers, AWS Global Accelerator, and Route 53 health checks.
C) Multi-AZ deployment in one region with VPN connections from on-premises networks.
D) Replicate static content to S3 buckets in each region with DNS failover routing.
Answer: B
Explanation:
To provide a multi-region, low-latency, highly available web application, the architecture must support dynamic traffic routing, automated failover, and secure connectivity. Option A), a single-region deployment with CloudFront caching and Route 53 weighted routing, optimizes static content delivery but cannot handle dynamic application traffic effectively. Failover to other regions is limited, resulting in higher latency and reduced availability for geographically distant users. Option C), deploying in multiple availability zones within one region, provides regional resilience but does not reduce latency for users in other regions. VPN connections from on-premises networks do not improve global access and introduce unnecessary complexity. Option D), replicating static content to S3 buckets in each region with DNS failover, addresses only static content and does not solve the problem of dynamic application routing or real-time traffic management. Option B), deploying Application Load Balancers in multiple regions combined with AWS Global Accelerator, is the most suitable solution. Global Accelerator provides static IP addresses, reduces DNS lookup latency, and intelligently routes traffic to the closest healthy regional endpoint using the AWS global network, ensuring consistent low-latency access. Application Load Balancers manage traffic within each region, supporting dynamic application workloads, TLS termination, and path-based routing. Route 53 health checks integrated with Global Accelerator ensure that traffic is redirected automatically in case of regional failures, providing high availability without manual intervention. This architecture also supports security controls, including security groups, WAF rules, IAM policies, and encryption in transit, ensuring secure global traffic management. Monitoring using CloudWatch metrics and logs enables administrators to detect performance bottlenecks and maintain visibility into traffic patterns. Overall, this solution ensures fast, resilient, and secure access for a global user base while minimizing operational complexity, making it ideal for enterprise-grade, latency-sensitive applications that span multiple regions.
Question 179
An organization is building a multi-region architecture for a high-transaction database that requires near real-time replication and global read access. Which AWS solution is optimal?
A) Daily snapshots of RDS replicated to S3 in secondary regions.
B) Amazon Aurora Global Database with read replicas in multiple regions.
C) VPC peering with EC2 instances running database replication scripts across regions.
D) AWS DataSync to copy database files hourly across regions.
Answer: B
Explanation:
For a high-transaction, multi-region database, the solution must ensure low-latency replication, global read scalability, and automated failover. Option A), daily RDS snapshots to S3, is suitable for backup purposes but cannot achieve near real-time replication. The replication delay is significant, and recovery point objectives (RPOs) are high, which is unsuitable for mission-critical applications. Option C), VPC peering with EC2 instances running custom replication scripts, introduces complexity, high operational overhead, and maintenance challenges. Scaling such an approach to multiple regions increases the risk of errors and latency. Option D), AWS DataSync copying database files hourly, operates asynchronously and cannot provide near real-time replication, resulting in outdated data for global reads. Option B), Amazon Aurora Global Database, is specifically designed for low-latency, multi-region replication. It supports a primary writer region and read-only replicas in secondary regions with replication lag typically under 1 second, providing near real-time data consistency. Aurora Global Database allows global users to access local read replicas, reducing latency and improving application performance. In case of a regional failure, the system can promote a secondary region as the new primary with minimal downtime, supporting disaster recovery objectives. Aurora also integrates with CloudWatch, Enhanced Monitoring, and automated backups, ensuring observability and operational simplicity. Security features like KMS encryption, IAM policies, and VPC isolation protect sensitive data across regions. The solution is highly scalable, allowing for additional read replicas or regions to be added with minimal effort. Aurora Global Database ensures resilient, high-performance, secure, and operationally efficient multi-region database replication, making it ideal for enterprises requiring near real-time global access to transactional workloads.
Question 180
A company operates several VPCs across multiple regions and wants to establish secure, high-throughput connectivity to on-premises networks while maintaining centralized route management. Which AWS design pattern should be used?
A) Configure VPN connections from each VPC to on-premises networks with static routing.
B) Use AWS Transit Gateway in each region, inter-region peering, and a Direct Connect Gateway for centralized on-premises connectivity.
C) Establish VPC peering between all regional VPCs and manage multiple VPNs for on-premises access.
D) Deploy CloudFront with private endpoints for direct on-premises communication.
Answer: B
Explanation:
Connecting multiple VPCs across regions to on-premises networks requires a solution that ensures secure, high-throughput, low-latency connectivity while simplifying network management and scalability. Option A), configuring VPN connections with static routes from each VPC, introduces operational complexity, requires manual route updates, and has limited throughput due to reliance on internet-based VPNs. Option C), VPC peering combined with multiple VPNs, creates a full-mesh network that does not scale efficiently and increases administrative overhead. It also fails to provide centralized route management, making monitoring and troubleshooting more complex. Option D), CloudFront with private endpoints, is designed for content delivery optimization and cannot provide real-time, private connectivity for hybrid network workloads. Option B), using AWS Transit Gateway in each region, inter-region peering, and a Direct Connect Gateway for on-premises connectivity, provides a centralized hub-and-spoke architecture. Transit Gateways centralize route management for all VPCs within each region, while inter-region peering leverages AWS’s private backbone for low-latency, high-throughput connectivity. The Direct Connect Gateway establishes secure, dedicated access to on-premises networks, ensuring consistent performance and eliminating dependence on the public internet. Route propagation automates updates across all connected VPCs, minimizing manual configuration and operational overhead. Security is enhanced through VPC segmentation, security groups, IAM policies, and encryption, while monitoring through CloudWatch flow logs provides comprehensive visibility. This design scales efficiently as new regions, VPCs, or on-premises sites are added, providing a future-proof, secure, and highly performant hybrid network architecture suitable for enterprise-scale applications requiring global reach.
