Topic 1 Question 451
A company is designing an AWS environment for a manufacturing application. The application has been successful with customers, and the application's user base has increased. The company has connected the AWS environment to the company's on-premises data center through a 1 Gbps AWS Direct Connect connection. The company has configured BGP for the connection.
The company must update the existing network connectivity solution to ensure that the solution is highly available, fault tolerant, and secure.
Which solution will meet these requirements MOST cost-effectively?
Add a dynamic private IP AWS Site-to-Site VPN as a secondary path to secure data in transit and provide resilience for the Direct Connect connection. Configure MACsec to encrypt traffic inside the Direct Connect connection.
Provision another Direct Connect connection between the company's on-premises data center and AWS to increase the transfer speed and provide resilience. Configure MACsec to encrypt traffic inside the Direct Connect connection.
Configure multiple private VIFs. Load balance data across the VIFs between the on-premises data center and AWS to provide resilience.
Add a static AWS Site-to-Site VPN as a secondary path to secure data in transit and to provide resilience for the Direct Connect connection.
ユーザの投票
コメント(15)
- 正解だと思う選択肢: D
MACsec is only supported on 10gbps and 100gbps Direct Connect https://docs.aws.amazon.com/directconnect/latest/UserGuide/direct-connect-mac-sec-getting-started.html
👍 12oayoade2024/03/22 - 正解だと思う選択肢: A
Provide resilience for the Direct Connect connection. Configure MACsec to encrypt traffic inside the Direct Connect connection. More cost effective than the static Site-to-Site VPN in Option D (which does not have the MACsec encryption for additional security).
👍 3CMMC2024/03/18 - 正解だと思う選択肢: D
With A the VPN is dependent on the DX connection, so not adding any resilience. VPN is encrypted by default, D.
👍 2djangoUnchained2024/03/20
シャッフルモード