Amazon AWS Certified Advanced Networking – Specialty ANS-C01 Exam Dumps and Practice Test Questions Set 2 Q21-40

Visit here for our full Amazon AWS Certified Advanced Networking – Specialty ANS-C01 exam dumps and practice test questions.

Question 21

A company needs a secure, scalable way to connect multiple branch offices to AWS using the public internet while ensuring centralized routing control. Which solution meets this requirement?

A) AWS Direct Connect
B) AWS Site-to-Site VPN with AWS Transit Gateway
C) VPC Peering
D) AWS Client VPN

Answer: B

Explanation: 

AWS Direct Connect provides a private and dedicated physical connection into AWS, offering predictable performance and lower latency compared to typical internet-based connections. However, it does not inherently support scalable multi-branch architectures unless combined with additional components, nor does it use the public internet as required. Direct Connect is most suitable when a company needs high-throughput and low-latency private links, making it less aligned with the requirement for scalable internet-based connectivity across multiple branches.

AWS Site-to-Site VPN with AWS Transit Gateway offers a fully managed and easily scalable method of linking multiple external networks to AWS over the public internet. Each branch can create an IPsec VPN connection to the Transit Gateway, allowing centralized routing, segmentation, and expansion with minimal overhead. This model aligns well when several branch sites must interconnect with AWS resources while avoiding complex mesh VPN topologies. Transit Gateway also centralizes route propagation and attachment management, significantly simplifying multi-branch connectivity.

VPC Peering enables private communication between two VPCs, but it is not meant for connecting external branch offices. It lacks transitive routing, making it unsuitable for a hub-and-spoke architecture involving many remote office networks. VPC Peering is designed for VPC-to-VPC communication, not for integrating on-premises networks across the public internet.

AWS Client VPN is a fully managed, scalable VPN service but is intended mainly for end users, remote employees, or individual endpoint devices. It does not scale effectively for site-to-site connectivity because it lacks the routing capabilities needed for multi-branch interconnectivity. It also is not intended for replacing large-scale branch office networking or providing centralized routing control.

Therefore, the correct choice is AWS Site-to-Site VPN combined with AWS Transit Gateway. It leverages the public internet, supports large-scale multi-branch connectivity, centralizes routing in a single hub, and simplifies ongoing management. This approach achieves the desired combination of scalability, security, and centralized routing control in a manner consistent with enterprise networking designs in AWS.

Question 22

A company uses AWS Transit Gateway and wants to analyze traffic flows across VPCs and on-premises networks. Which service provides detailed flow-level visibility?

A) VPC Flow Logs with Amazon CloudWatch Logs
B) AWS Network Manager with Transit Gateway Flow Logs
C) AWS CloudTrail
D) Amazon GuardDuty

Answer: B

Explanation: 

VPC Flow Logs capture IP traffic metadata for network interfaces inside a VPC. While they provide significant visibility, they are limited to traffic flowing within and across VPC network interfaces. They do not capture the complete inter-VPC or hybrid connectivity flows routed by a Transit Gateway. Although useful for VPC-level monitoring, they are insufficient for complete centralized visibility when a Transit Gateway is involved. Additionally, they only show interface-level logs rather than full Transit Gateway flow paths.

AWS Network Manager with Transit Gateway Flow Logs is specifically designed to capture and analyze network traffic across Transit Gateway attachments. This includes inter-VPC traffic, VPC-to-on-premises traffic, and cross-region flows in global networks. Network Manager aggregates flow metrics and integrates with Amazon CloudWatch Logs or Amazon S3 for log storage. It provides near real-time visibility into Transit Gateway traffic paths, packet counts, and flow characteristics. This feature is purpose-built for organizations requiring a detailed understanding of multi-VPC and hybrid network behavior, making it the most suitable choice for analyzing cross-network flows.

AWS CloudTrail tracks API calls and user activity but does not capture traffic flows or packet metadata. It is useful for auditing operations, detecting unauthorized resource changes, or understanding administrative behavior. However, it offers no network-level visibility into packet paths or the traffic traversing network gateways, so it does not satisfy the need for traffic flow analysis.

Amazon GuardDuty analyzes VPC Flow Logs and DNS logs for suspicious or malicious behavior. While it is a powerful threat detection service, it does not provide complete flow-level analysis for Transit Gateway traffic. It helps identify anomalies, brute-force attempts, or reconnaissance, but it is not designed to produce detailed flow metrics across hybrid connections or Transit Gateway attachments.

Therefore, AWS Network Manager with Transit Gateway Flow Logs is the optimal solution because it provides centralized, detailed, Transit Gateway-specific flow visibility that aligns precisely with the requirement to analyze traffic flows across VPCs and on-premises networks.

Question 23

An enterprise requires low-latency, high-bandwidth access to Amazon S3 from its on-premises data center. Consistent throughput is mandatory. Which solution is best?

A) NAT Gateway
B) AWS Direct Connect with an S3 VPC endpoint
C) AWS Direct Connect with a public VIF
D) Site-to-Site VPN with BGP routing

Answer: C

Explanation: 

NAT Gateway is used for outbound internet access from resources inside a VPC, primarily for instances needing access to the internet while preventing inbound connections. It does not apply to on-premises environments nor does it guarantee any bandwidth or latency requirements. NAT Gateway would not be involved in integrating on-premises networks with AWS nor in delivering high-performance connectivity to Amazon S3.

AWS Direct Connect with an S3 VPC endpoint may seem like a reasonable approach, but VPC endpoints for S3 operate strictly within a VPC. The on-premises environment cannot access an S3 VPC endpoint directly because these endpoints are only routable inside VPC subnets. Direct Connect private VIFs can reach private VPC resources but cannot directly route to S3 through a VPC endpoint. Thus, although S3 access from VPCs via endpoints is optimized, this architecture cannot satisfy direct on-premises S3 access.

AWS Direct Connect with a public VIF provides a dedicated, high-bandwidth, low-latency connection into AWS public services, including S3. It avoids the variability and congestion of the public internet while offering consistent performance. Amazon S3 is reachable over Direct Connect public VIFs, allowing the enterprise to benefit from reliable throughput and predictable latency. This aligns with the stated requirement of high-bandwidth and low-latency access from the on-premises data center to S3.

Site-to-Site VPN with BGP routing operates over the public internet and therefore cannot guarantee consistent latency or throughput. VPN connections experience unpredictable performance due to internet variability. As a result, they are ill-suited for demanding applications requiring reliable and sustained bandwidth for large S3 workloads or high-performance data transfer requirements.

Therefore, the ideal solution is AWS Direct Connect with a public VIF. It provides predictable performance, dedicated bandwidth, and reliable connectivity to Amazon S3, fulfilling all aspects of the requirement.

Question 24

A company operates multiple VPCs and needs transitive routing between them without managing individual peering connections. Which feature satisfies this requirement?

A) VPC Peering
B) Amazon Route 53 Resolver
C) AWS Transit Gateway
D) PrivateLink

Answer: C

Explanation: 

VPC Peering provides a simple and private connection between two VPCs. However, it lacks support for transitive routing, requiring administrators to manually establish and manage multiple peering relationships for multi-VPC environments. For organizations with many VPCs, this quickly leads to routing complexity and operational overhead. Since it does not enable traffic to pass through a peered VPC to reach additional VPCs, it does not meet the requirement for transitive routing across multiple networks.

Amazon Route 53 Resolver provides DNS resolution capabilities between on-premises networks and AWS VPCs. While it supports hybrid DNS functionality using inbound and outbound resolver endpoints, it does not provide routing capabilities. DNS alone cannot support IP-level routing or act as a transitive network hub. Therefore, despite being helpful for name resolution, it does not address traffic routing needs.

AWS Transit Gateway directly supports scalable, transitive routing between multiple VPCs, on-premises networks, and even across AWS Regions through inter-region peering. It simplifies centralizing network connectivity by acting as a hub to which VPCs connect. This eliminates the need for numerous peering links and enables consistent routing propagation and simple policy-based control. Its ability to provide high-scale attachments and centralized routing makes it the ideal solution for the requirement.

PrivateLink provides private connectivity to services, allowing access through interface endpoints. However, it does not support VPC-to-VPC routing beyond accessing specific services. It cannot serve as a transitive routing mechanism or enable broad network-level connectivity. PrivateLink is strictly service-centric and does not facilitate general VPC network connectivity.

Thus, AWS Transit Gateway is the correct solution because it natively supports transitive routing across multiple VPCs and hybrid networks without the complexity of managing individual peering relationships.

Question 25

A global enterprise needs to connect multiple AWS Regions and maintain consistent routing policies. What feature simplifies global WAN orchestration?

A) AWS Network Manager
B) VPC Peering
C) AWS Global Accelerator
D) AWS Direct Connect Gateway

Answer: A

Explanation: 

AWS Network Manager is designed for orchestrating multi-region, multi-VPC, and hybrid networks. It integrates tightly with AWS Transit Gateway and Transit Gateway peering to build and manage global networks. Network Manager automatically maps network topology, monitors health, and tracks routing changes. This makes it ideal for enterprises that require consistent routing policies across regions, centralized visibility, and simplified operational management. It can also integrate with third-party SD-WAN appliances to provide unified control across cloud and on-prem architectures.

VPC Peering is region-bound unless explicitly configured for inter-region peering, and even then, it lacks transitive routing and centralized policy mechanisms. Managing multiple peering connections manually becomes unmanageable in a global enterprise environment. Without a centralized orchestration layer, maintaining consistent routing policies across regions becomes difficult and operationally heavy.

AWS Global Accelerator optimizes traffic routing for applications by directing users to the nearest AWS endpoint. It enhances application performance but is not a tool for managing routing policies between AWS Regions. Its purpose is global edge acceleration and improved availability rather than serving as a WAN orchestration platform.

AWS Direct Connect Gateway allows on-premises networks to be connected through Direct Connect to multiple VPCs across different regions. While useful for hybrid connectivity, Direct Connect Gateway does not orchestrate or manage WAN routing policies between AWS Regions. It enhances hybrid access but does not provide end-to-end policy control across inter-region paths.

Therefore, AWS Network Manager is the correct solution because it offers comprehensive global WAN orchestration, automated mapping, route analysis, and centralized operational visibility across regions.

Question 26

A network team needs to restrict outbound traffic from a VPC to only specific fully qualified domain names. Which AWS service or feature enables this?

A) Security Groups
B) NAT Gateway
C) Route 53 Resolver DNS Firewall
D) Network ACLs

Answer: C

Explanation: 

Security Groups act as stateful virtual firewalls that filter traffic based on IP addresses, ports, and protocols. They cannot restrict outbound traffic based on domain names because they operate at layer 3 and layer 4. There is no mechanism within Security Groups to inspect DNS queries or enforce policies based on fully qualified domain names. This makes them unsuited for domain-based restrictions.

NAT Gateway provides outbound internet access for private subnets but offers no filtering or inspection capabilities based on domain names. Its function is strictly to perform network address translation, allowing private instances to connect to the internet while preserving security. Since it does not evaluate DNS content or enforce domain controls, it cannot provide the required restriction mechanism.

Route 53 Resolver DNS Firewall is explicitly designed to filter DNS queries based on domain names. It allows administrators to create domain rule groups and apply them to VPCs. Outbound DNS queries that match blocked domain names are denied, while permitted domains continue to resolve normally. Since the requirement is to restrict outbound traffic based on fully qualified domain names, DNS Firewall is the most suitable tool. It also integrates seamlessly with Route 53 Resolver endpoints, providing granular DNS-layer control.

Network ACLs operate statelessly at the subnet boundary and filter traffic based on IP addresses and protocols. They cannot inspect or enforce rules based on domain names, since domain-based restrictions occur at the application and DNS layers rather than at the IP layer. Due to their lack of inspection capabilities, they cannot meet the need for domain-based restrictions.

Therefore, Route 53 Resolver DNS Firewall is the best solution, because it directly supports creating rules that block or allow DNS queries to specific domain names, meeting the requirement precisely.

Question 27

A company needs to extend its on-premises SD-WAN architecture into AWS. Which component integrates best with SD-WAN appliances for simplified AWS cloud connectivity?

A) VPC Peering
B) AWS Transit Gateway Connect
C) AWS Direct Connect Gateway
D) Elastic Load Balancer

Answer: B

Explanation: 

VPC Peering cannot integrate directly with SD-WAN architectures. It provides private connectivity between individual VPCs, lacking transitive routing and dynamic routing capabilities needed for SD-WAN integration. SD-WAN designs rely on dynamic route exchange and centralized hub models, which are incompatible with the decentralized, non-transitive nature of VPC Peering.

AWS Transit Gateway Connect provides GRE tunnels and BGP support, enabling third-party SD-WAN appliances to integrate smoothly into an AWS environment. This feature allows cloud-based SD-WAN hubs to communicate with Transit Gateway attachments. Transit Gateway Connect enables dynamic routing, high performance, and scalable connectivity. It simplifies cloud extension of SD-WAN topologies, making it ideal for enterprises transitioning hybrid networks toward dynamic overlay models.

AWS Direct Connect Gateway enables hybrid connectivity between on-premises infrastructure and AWS but does not integrate with SD-WAN overlay networks. It provides private, physical connectivity rather than overlay tunnel integration. Since SD-WAN environments rely on software-defined overlays rather than dedicated fiber links, Direct Connect Gateway is not sufficient.

Elastic Load Balancer distributes application traffic but plays no role in integrating network architectures. It does not participate in routing between SD-WAN appliances and cloud networks and cannot support GRE tunnels or BGP.

Thus, AWS Transit Gateway Connect is the correct answer because it is designed specifically for seamless SD-WAN integration using GRE and BGP.

Question 28

A company wants to use AWS Global Accelerator to improve application performance for global users. What must the application endpoints support?

A) IPv6-only traffic
B) Anycast routing from AWS Regions
C) Regional failover and health checks
D) Direct connectivity to Amazon CloudFront

Answer: C

Explanation: 

IPv6-only traffic is not a requirement for AWS Global Accelerator. The service supports both IPv4 and IPv6 client traffic depending on configuration. Applications do not need to be IPv6-only to use accelerator endpoints. Global Accelerator assigns static Anycast IP addresses, but the backend services themselves can be IPv4. Thus, IPv6-only support is irrelevant to the requirement.

Anycast routing from AWS Regions is not something the application itself must implement. Global Accelerator uses Anycast at the edge, but backend endpoints do not need to understand or support Anycast. The Anycast behavior is handled by AWS infrastructure. Application endpoints simply receive traffic forwarded by the accelerator and do not participate in routing decisions.

Regional failover and health checks are central requirements for Global Accelerator operation. The application must expose endpoints that can be monitored through health checks. When a health check fails, Global Accelerator automatically shifts traffic to a healthy regional endpoint. This means the application must support being deployed across multiple Regions or Availability Zones and must allow traffic redirection based on health. Without endpoint health check capability and multi-region resilience, Global Accelerator cannot operate correctly.

Direct connectivity to Amazon CloudFront is not a requirement. CloudFront is a separate edge service. While the two can complement each other, they do not require direct integration. CloudFront caches content, whereas Global Accelerator routes TCP/UDP traffic with static IPs.

Hence, the correct choice is that the application must support regional failover and health checks for Global Accelerator to function as intended.

Question 29

A company wants hybrid DNS resolution between AWS and on-premises systems, allowing DNS queries from on-premises to resolve private AWS records. What should they implement?

A) Amazon Route 53 Public Hosted Zone
B) Route 53 Resolver inbound endpoint
C) Route 53 Resolver outbound endpoint
D) PrivateLink

Answer: B

Explanation: 

Amazon Route 53 Public Hosted Zones provide DNS records for public-facing domains. These records are resolvable from the internet and are not meant for private AWS resources or hybrid DNS architectures. On-premises systems needing to resolve private AWS names cannot use public hosted zones because they expose DNS names publicly and compromise internal DNS visibility requirements. This makes them unsuitable for private hybrid DNS resolution.

Route 53 Resolver inbound endpoints allow on-premises DNS resolvers to forward DNS queries into AWS for resolution of private hosted zone records. This is exactly the mechanism required for hybrid environments where internal systems need to resolve private AWS names. With inbound endpoints, DNS queries flow from on-premises to AWS, enabling full private-resolution integration.

Route 53 Resolver outbound endpoints are used for sending DNS queries from AWS to external DNS servers, such as on-premises environments. These are useful for the reverse direction but do not satisfy the requirement for on-premises systems to resolve AWS private names. Since outbound endpoints send queries outward rather than accepting inbound requests, they do not solve the scenario.

PrivateLink provides private connectivity to AWS services but is unrelated to DNS resolution. While it can help access services privately over interface endpoints, it cannot resolve DNS queries originating on-premises unless combined with DNS mechanisms.

Therefore, the correct answer is Route 53 Resolver inbound endpoint, which directly supports private DNS resolution from on-premises networks into AWS.

Question 30

A company needs to isolate specific workloads inside a VPC but also share certain services between multiple VPCs. What AWS feature enables this capability?

A) VPC Peering
B) AWS Resource Access Manager with Shared VPC
C) Network ACLs
D) NAT Gateway

Answer: B

Explanation: 

VPC Peering enables connectivity between VPCs but does not provide structured multi-tenant isolation within a single VPC. It is a flat networking construct and lacks mechanisms to selectively share specific resources such as subnets or services. Without resource sharing constructs, it cannot meet the need for intra-VPC workload isolation combined with cross-VPC shared service access.

AWS Resource Access Manager (RAM) with Shared VPC allows multiple accounts to share subnets and services while maintaining isolation of workloads within those subnets. This is particularly useful for enterprises with centrally managed network infrastructure. Each participating account can run workloads in dedicated subnets while centrally shared services reside in common subnets. This design enables both isolation and sharing within a unified network architecture. RAM supports sharing subnets, Transit Gateway attachments, and other networking resources. This makes it ideal for the requirement of isolated workloads alongside shared services.

Network ACLs filter traffic at the subnet boundary but do not offer resource-sharing capabilities. They enforce stateless packet filtering and cannot selectively share resources with other VPCs. Their limitations make them unsuitable for structured workload sharing and multi-account network design.

NAT Gateway provides outbound internet access for private subnets but does not enforce workload isolation nor enable sharing of services across VPC boundaries. Its function is restricted to address translation.

Thus, AWS Resource Access Manager with Shared VPC is the correct solution because it supports structured workload isolation along with shared services across multiple VPCs or accounts in a secure and scalable manner.

Question 31

A company needs to build a multi-Region AWS network where VPCs in different Regions can communicate using encrypted, low-latency, high-bandwidth links. Which feature should they use?

A) Transit Gateway inter-Region peering
B) VPC Peering
C) AWS Client VPN
D) NAT Gateway

Answer: A

Explanation: 

Transit Gateway inter-Region peering is designed to connect Transit Gateways across AWS Regions using high-bandwidth, encrypted AWS backbone links. This type of peering offers scalable routing, transitive traffic flow, and centralized management. With this method, multiple VPCs and on-premises networks in each Region can communicate through a central hub. The encryption is performed automatically by AWS, and the traffic does not traverse the public internet. This makes it ideal for multi-Region architectures requiring reliable, low-latency, and secure connectivity across global deployments.

VPC Peering allows connectivity between two VPCs but lacks transitive routing. Each VPC pair requires a separate configuration, which becomes increasingly complex in multi-Region environments. Although VPC Peering supports inter-Region links, it does not support routing through a central hub, meaning traffic cannot pass through one VPC to reach another. It also lacks advanced routing policies, attachment scalability, and centralized management features required by enterprises.

AWS Client VPN provides remote user connectivity, not VPC-to-VPC or Region-to-Region connectivity. It operates as an endpoint for individual clients such as laptops or remote workers. It cannot form the backbone of a global network infrastructure, and it does not function as a scalable routing system. It is irrelevant for connecting VPCs across Regions.

NAT Gateway enables outbound internet access for private subnets, but it does not provide any cross-Region routing capability. It is strictly used for egress NAT functions within a single VPC and cannot participate in creating a global cloud network. It is not related to secure multi-Region traffic flows or backbone-level routing.

Therefore, Transit Gateway inter-Region peering is the correct choice. It provides the encrypted connectivity, scale, low latency, and centralized routing required for a multi-Region network architecture. Its design aligns directly with enterprise global network requirements, and its integration with Transit Gateway routing tables simplifies management and operational overhead across Regions.

Question 32

A company wants highly available DNS resolution between AWS and an on-premises data center. They need AWS to resolve on-premises private DNS queries. What should they implement?

A) Route 53 Public Hosted Zone
B) Route 53 Resolver outbound endpoint
C) Direct Connect Gateway
D) Transit Gateway

Answer: B

Explanation: 

Route 53 Public Hosted Zones host publicly accessible DNS records. These records are resolvable from the internet and cannot be used for resolving private on-premises DNS names. They also do not support hybrid DNS functionality. Since the requirement involves private DNS queries flowing from AWS to on-premises DNS servers, public hosted zones are entirely unsuitable.

Route 53 Resolver outbound endpoints allow DNS queries from AWS VPCs to be forwarded to on-premises DNS servers. This functionality enables hybrid DNS resolution by sending private DNS queries from AWS to external DNS resolvers such as Active Directory DNS servers. With outbound endpoints, administrators can configure conditional forwarding rules to direct specific domain queries to on-premises systems. This aligns directly with the requirement for AWS to resolve private DNS names located on-prem.

Direct Connect Gateway is useful for hybrid network connectivity but plays no role in DNS resolution. It enables private routing paths between on-premises networks and multiple VPCs. However, DNS queries are application-layer traffic that requires DNS-specific infrastructure rather than routing connectivity alone. Direct Connect Gateway cannot forward DNS traffic in a structured or rule-based manner.

Transit Gateway enables IP-level routing between VPCs and on-premises networks. It is useful for hybrid data transfer but does not support DNS query forwarding. DNS resolution requires dedicated DNS resolver functionality, which Transit Gateway does not provide. Even with Transit Gateway handling routing, DNS queries still require endpoints and rules to ensure correct resolution paths.

Therefore, the best choice is Route 53 Resolver outbound endpoint because it enables AWS to send private DNS queries to on-premises DNS servers, meeting the requirement directly.

Question 33

A security team wants to inspect and filter all traffic between VPCs and on-premises environments before it reaches the destination. Which solution supports centralized traffic inspection?

A) Gateway Load Balancer
B) VPC Peering
C) NAT Instance
D) S3 VPC Endpoint

Answer: A

Explanation: 

Gateway Load Balancer is designed specifically to insert and scale security appliances inline with network traffic. It operates at layer 3 and integrates with virtual firewalls, intrusion detection systems, and deep packet inspection tools. With Gateway Load Balancer endpoints, traffic can be routed through inspection appliances before reaching its final destination. This enables centralized inspection across multiple VPCs and hybrid environments. It also scales elastically and supports transparent traffic flow redirection, making it ideal for enterprise security architectures requiring full traffic inspection.

VPC Peering provides direct connectivity between two VPCs but does not support centralized inspection. Traffic flows directly without a mechanism to insert an inspection layer. It also does not allow transitive routing, meaning it cannot be used to funnel traffic through an inspection VPC.

NAT Instances can provide limited packet inspection but are not scalable or efficient for enterprise use. They create bottlenecks, require manual management, and do not integrate well with multi-VPC architectures. They also do not support hybrid traffic inspection and cannot scale dynamically as traffic grows.

S3 VPC Endpoints provide private connectivity to Amazon S3 but do not support packet inspection. They operate at the service level and cannot intercept or examine general network traffic between VPCs or on-premises systems. They are irrelevant for centralized inspection purposes.

Thus, Gateway Load Balancer is the correct answer because it supports comprehensive, scalable, and centralized traffic inspection across cloud and hybrid networks.

Question 34

A company wants to restrict inter-VPC traffic to specific applications while avoiding full network-level connectivity. Which AWS feature is best?

A) Interface VPC Endpoints with PrivateLink
B) VPC Peering
C) Transit Gateway
D) Site-to-Site VPN

Answer: A

Explanation:

Interface VPC Endpoints using PrivateLink allow one VPC to access specific services in another VPC without enabling full VPC-to-VPC connectivity. PrivateLink exposes only selected services through interface endpoints and operates at layer 7. This provides strong isolation and minimizes the attack surface because only the desired application is exposed across VPC boundaries. It is the most appropriate solution when the requirement is application-level sharing rather than network-level connectivity.

VPC Peering provides full network-level connectivity between VPCs. Once peered, all subnets can communicate unless restricted by Security Groups or Network ACLs. This approach would expose too much connectivity and violates the requirement of restricting access to only specific applications.

Transit Gateway is a hub-and-spoke routing system that enables large-scale connectivity. However, it also provides network-level access rather than application-specific access. It is not suitable when the goal is to avoid broad inter-VPC communication.

Site-to-Site VPN connects on-premises networks to AWS. It does not apply to inter-VPC communication within AWS and is irrelevant for connecting specific applications between VPCs.

Therefore, Interface VPC Endpoints with PrivateLink meet the requirement because they limit connectivity to individual applications while avoiding full network-level access.

Question 35

A company wants a monitoring solution that tracks global network performance across AWS Regions, VPCs, and on-premises networks from a central view. Which service should they use?

A) AWS Network Manager
B) Amazon CloudWatch
C) AWS CloudTrail
D) VPC Flow Logs

Answer: A

Explanation: 

AWS Network Manager is built to visualize and monitor complex global network architectures, especially those involving multiple Regions, Transit Gateways, SD-WAN appliances, and hybrid data centers. It automatically maps network topologies, tracks link performance, logs routing changes, and monitors connectivity health. It provides a centralized view of cloud and on-premises networks, meeting the requirement for global oversight.

Amazon CloudWatch monitors metrics, logs, and application performance. Although it can integrate with networking features, it does not provide a comprehensive global network view. CloudWatch lacks topology visualization and multi-Region network mapping capabilities, making it insufficient for global network monitoring.

AWS CloudTrail logs API calls and resource modifications but does not provide performance or connectivity monitoring. It is useful for audits and compliance rather than real-time network monitoring.

VPC Flow Logs capture IP traffic metadata within VPCs but do not assemble global views of multi-Region networks. They lack end-to-end visibility and do not integrate hybrid network performance metrics.

Thus, AWS Network Manager is the correct answer because it provides centralized, global, end-to-end network monitoring.

Question 36

A company runs latency-sensitive workloads that must maintain TCP sessions even if the traffic shifts between AWS Regions. Which service provides static IPs and seamless failover?

A) Elastic IP
B) AWS Global Accelerator
C) Amazon CloudFront
D) Route 53 Weighted Routing

Answer: B

Explanation: 

Elastic IP addresses offer static IPv4 addresses that can be associated with EC2 instances within a single AWS Region. However, they are not designed for global traffic management, nor do they support failover between Regions. Because Elastic IPs are Region-bound and use unicast addressing, any attempt to shift application traffic across Regions would break existing TCP sessions. This makes Elastic IPs unsuitable for applications requiring global resilience and session continuity.

AWS Global Accelerator solves this by providing Anycast static IP addresses that are advertised from multiple AWS edge locations around the world. These IPs remain the same regardless of which AWS Region or endpoint is currently active. When traffic is routed through these Anycast IPs, Global Accelerator automatically directs user connections to the optimal healthy endpoint using AWS’s global network. One major advantage is that client TCP or UDP sessions remain intact even if the accelerator shifts traffic to a different Region due to endpoint failures or performance optimization. This offers seamless failover and low-latency routing, which is essential for latency-sensitive workloads that cannot tolerate dropped sessions or reconnection delays.

Amazon CloudFront is a globally distributed content delivery network focused on caching and accelerating static and dynamic content. However, CloudFront is primarily HTTP and HTTPS–oriented and does not preserve TCP sessions for application backends. It does not provide static Anycast IPs for application traffic and therefore cannot maintain long-lived sessions during failover.

Route 53 Weighted Routing allows DNS-based traffic distribution but cannot maintain TCP connections once established. DNS-based failover operates at the domain name resolution layer and cannot preserve ongoing sessions when traffic shifts between endpoints. Because DNS caching and propagation vary among clients, it provides no guarantee of instantaneous or session-preserving failover.

Therefore, AWS Global Accelerator is the correct choice for static Anycast IPs, low-latency routing, and seamless cross-Region failover while maintaining active TCP sessions.

Question 37

A company wants to reduce data transfer costs for inter-AZ communication within a VPC while maintaining high availability. Which design approach helps?

A) Use Gateway Load Balancer
B) Deploy resources in a single AZ
C) Use VPC endpoints
D) Use placement groups

Answer: D

Explanation: 

Gateway Load Balancer is designed for integrating and scaling third-party virtual appliances such as firewalls, IDS/IPS systems, and traffic inspection tools. Although it simplifies routing through inspection appliances, it does not address inter-AZ data transfer patterns or assist in lowering inter-AZ communication costs. It is not intended for optimizing placement or minimizing how often workloads communicate across Availability Zones.

Deploying all resources in a single Availability Zone does reduce or eliminate inter-AZ data transfer charges because no cross-AZ traffic occurs. However, this approach is not recommended for production environments that require high availability. Using a single AZ introduces a single point of failure and contradicts AWS best practices for fault tolerance. A design focused solely on cost reduction at the expense of resiliency is considered an anti-pattern.

VPC endpoints are used to privately connect your VPC to AWS services such as S3 or DynamoDB. They lower data transfer charges in some scenarios and reduce reliance on public internet paths, but they do not influence EC2-to-EC2 traffic between Availability Zones. They do not change routing behavior or reduce the general cost structure associated with inter-AZ communication within the VPC.

Placement groups, specifically cluster placement groups, improve network locality by keeping instances close together within the same AZ. While placement groups do not span multiple AZs, using them allows workloads with high levels of east-west traffic to communicate with much lower latency and much higher bandwidth. When workloads run within a cluster placement group, applications that would otherwise be distributed across different AZs can instead run within a tightly grouped set of hardware. This effectively reduces the need for inter-AZ communication, thereby reducing the associated data transfer charges. Additionally, placement groups encourage better workload affinity and reduce the network distance between dependent services.

Thus, placement groups are the best option for reducing unnecessary inter-AZ traffic while still maintaining high-performance communication within an AZ.

Question 38

A company wants to use AWS Direct Connect for hybrid connectivity but needs to share the connection with multiple AWS accounts. What feature enables this?

A) Direct Connect Gateway
B) Transit Gateway with VPN
C) VPC Peering
D) Lambda-based routing

Answer: A

Explanation:

Direct Connect Gateway enables organizations to connect a single AWS Direct Connect connection to multiple VPCs across multiple AWS accounts and even across multiple AWS Regions, with the exception of China Regions. The key function of a Direct Connect Gateway is to decouple the physical connectivity from specific VPCs. This allows large enterprises or multi-account environments to share a single high-bandwidth Direct Connect link efficiently and securely. When an organization grows and adds more accounts or VPCs, the same Direct Connect infrastructure can be reused without deploying new circuits. This centralization not only reduces cost but simplifies network management and routing.

Transit Gateway with VPN enables hub-and-spoke connectivity for VPCs and on-premises networks, but it does not inherently allow multiple accounts to share Direct Connect unless used in combination with a Direct Connect Gateway. Even then, the underlying feature that enables cross-account and cross-Region DX sharing is the Direct Connect Gateway itself. Transit Gateway alone cannot attach directly to a physical Direct Connect connection.

VPC Peering provides a direct link between two VPCs but is limited to VPC-to-VPC networking. It does not integrate with Direct Connect circuits for hybrid connectivity, nor does it provide scalable connectivity across many accounts. You would need many peering links and still would not have shared Direct Connect access, making it unsuitable for this use case.

Lambda-based routing is not a networking mechanism and cannot establish hybrid connectivity or route traffic between on-premises environments and AWS. It is unrelated to infrastructure-level routing and connectivity design.

Therefore, Direct Connect Gateway is the correct and most scalable solution for sharing a single Direct Connect circuit across multiple AWS accounts and multiple VPCs, enabling flexible and cost-efficient hybrid architectures.

Question 39

A company needs to enforce consistent security policies across thousands of VPCs. Which AWS service helps centrally manage these rules?

A) AWS Firewall Manager
B) NAT Gateway
C) VPC Peering
D) S3 VPC Endpoint

Answer: A

Explanation:

AWS Firewall Manager provides centralized security policy management across many AWS accounts and VPCs within an AWS Organization. It is designed for large-scale environments where consistent enforcement of security rules is critical. Firewall Manager integrates with services such as AWS WAF, AWS Shield Advanced, and security groups, allowing administrators to create global rules that automatically apply to existing and newly created resources. This ensures that every workload follows the same security standards without requiring manual configuration in each individual account.

Using Firewall Manager, administrators can enforce mandatory security group structures, WAF rules across CloudFront distributions, and protections for Application Load Balancers. It also simplifies compliance monitoring by identifying non-compliant resources and automatically correcting them. For environments with large numbers of VPCs spread across multiple business units, Firewall Manager prevents configuration drift and ensures uniform security posture.

NAT Gateway does not provide any policy enforcement capabilities. It is strictly used to allow outbound internet access for private-subnet resources. It is unrelated to large-scale security governance or centralized rule management.

VPC Peering enables private network communication between VPCs but offers no central security policy mechanisms. It does not enforce or distribute firewall rules and has no awareness of security posture across accounts.

S3 VPC Endpoints allow private connectivity to Amazon S3 without relying on the public internet, but they do not enforce security policies beyond controlling access to S3 using endpoint policies. They do not operate at the organizational level and cannot manage rules for thousands of VPCs.

Thus, AWS Firewall Manager is the only option that delivers centralized, automated, organization-wide security policy governance.

Question 40

A company wants to simplify BGP configuration for multiple Site-to-Site VPN connections. Which AWS service helps aggregate routes?

A) Transit Gateway
B) Route 53
C) CloudFront
D) Global Accelerator

Answer: A

Explanation:

AWS Transit Gateway provides a scalable hub-and-spoke architecture that simplifies routing between VPCs, on-premises networks, and VPN connections. One of its major benefits is central route aggregation. When multiple Site-to-Site VPN tunnels connect into a Transit Gateway, BGP routes learned through these VPNs can be aggregated and propagated automatically to connected VPCs or other networks. This reduces the complexity that administrators face when managing numerous individual VPN connections. Without a Transit Gateway, each VPN would require separate configuration and route propagation into each VPC, creating a management burden and increasing the likelihood of misconfiguration.

Using Transit Gateway, organizations maintain a single set of routing tables that handle all east-west and north-south network flows. Because the Transit Gateway acts as a central policy and routing hub, it dramatically simplifies hybrid connectivity. It also supports dynamic routing via BGP, allowing organizations to advertise summarized routes to on-premises environments. This leads to more scalable and cleaner routing designs.

Route 53 is a DNS service and does not participate in network-layer routing or VPN route aggregation. DNS cannot manage BGP routes or network prefixes.

CloudFront is a CDN used to improve the performance of content delivery. It is not a network routing or connectivity orchestration service and has no involvement in managing hybrid or VPN networks.

Global Accelerator uses Anycast IPs to improve performance for global users, but it does not participate in hybrid network routing or aggregate BGP routes. It focuses on optimizing user traffic to application endpoints, not managing network-level connectivity.

Therefore, Transit Gateway is the correct service for simplifying BGP configuration, centralizing routing, and aggregating routes from multiple Site-to-Site VPN tunnels.