Topic 1 Question 287
2 つ選択A company is managing a website with a global user base hosted on Amazon EC2 with an Application Load Balancer (ALB). To reduce the load on the web servers, a SysOps administrator configures an Amazon CloudFront distribution with the ALB as the origin. After a week of monitoring the solution, the administrator notices that requests are still being served by the ALB and there is no change in the web server load.
What are possible causes for this problem?
CloudFront does not have the ALB configured as the origin access identity.
The DNS is still pointing to the ALB instead of the CloudFront distribution.
The ALB security group is not permitting inbound traffic from CloudFront.
The default, minimum, and maximum Time to Live (TTL) are set to 0 seconds on the CloudFront distribution.
The target groups associated with the ALB are configured for sticky sessions.
コメント(2)
I believe "B" is correct. However, I can't decide between "A" or "D" because I know the OAI setting is necessary to enforce users to go through CloudFront. However, the question isn't clearly stating that. The ALB needs to clearly be configured as the Origin. The way they state the question is muddying up the distinction between "Origin" and "Origin Access Identity" which I distinguish as a setting in CloudFront.
In regards to "D", as I looked into it, the "TTL" of 0 (zero) only means the edge passes on every request to the origin to see if the object has changed. If not, then the object is not recent. This setting would still impact the origin to some degree, but not anything like if they object were not being cashed at all. Weighing that against the OAI presumably not being enabled (as in "A"), I see not having OAI not being enabled as far more of a problem as users can bypass CloudFront. Now I'm back trying to figure out if "A" is really stating that, or just trying to make a confused statement as a trick response.
Appreciate more informed thoughts on this from others.
👍 2Gomer2023/05/02A and B
👍 1Julio982023/05/29
シャッフルモード