Exam AWS Certified Solutions Architect - Associate SAA-C03 topic 1 question 29 discussion

agree with A, Global Accelerator has automatic failover and is perfect for this scenario with VoIP https://aws.amazon.com/global-accelerator/faqs/

CloudFront uses Edge Locations to cache content while Global Accelerator uses Edge Locations to find an optimal pathway to the nearest regional endpoint. CloudFront is designed to handle HTTP protocol meanwhile Global Accelerator is best used for both HTTP and non-HTTP protocols such as TCP and UDP. so i think A is a better answer

Aws GA is most suitable for https.

A : UDP so NLB and Global Accelerator reduces the number of hops by providing packets to travel over congestion free AWS global network. Global Accelerator supported end point : ALB,NLB,EC2 & Elastic IP address

you can configure a Network Load Balancer (NLB) in each AWS Region to address your on-premises endpoints. Then you can register the NLBs as endpoints in your AWS Global Accelerator configuration. https://aws.amazon.com/global-accelerator/faqs/

UDP Connection :- So NLB Routing to region having lowest latency and also with Automated failover, Also non-HTTP use cases, such as gaming (UDP), or Voice over IP - Global Accelerator

A is correct because Accelerator endpoint usefull more than route53

Correct as Global accelerator is most preferred for TCP and UDP

A ia correct

A is right answer, key words VoIP, UDP connection, automatic failover between region.

One of the major benefits of AWS Global Accelerator is Instant regional failover: AWS Global Accelerator automatically checks the health of your applications and routes user traffic only to healthy application endpoints. If the health status changes or you make configuration updates, AWS Global Accelerator reacts instantaneously to route your users to the next available endpoint. https://aws.amazon.com/global-accelerator/faqs/

Agree with C. As i understand NLB cannot be used as AWS Global accelerator endpoint. It has to be ALB or ELB.

Its UDP so ALB is not applicable here which means BD are wrong C using CF that uses latency record as origin? Makes no sense B NLB autoscaling and AWS GA is best used for lower latency and scaling. Recommended read: https://aws.amazon.com/blogs/networking-and-content-delivery/well-architecting-online-applications-with-cloudfront-and-aws-global-accelerator/

Answer-A

https://docs.aws.amazon.com/Route53/latest/DeveloperGuide/routing-policy-latency.html

Why ALB, not NLB?

"The company needs to route users to the Region with the lowest latency. The company also needs automated failover between Regions." IMO both A and C would meet both requirements. The main difference is that with A, the IP address stays the same - in case of failover, it would be routed to a different entry point. With C, the different endpoint have different IP addresses, and in case of failover, DNS would return the IP address of a different entry point. Thus failover might take longer with C, but again, the stem does not mention that failover must be fast ...