Exam AWS Certified Solutions Architect - Associate SAA-C02 topic 1 question 267 discussion

https://docs.aws.amazon.com/AmazonCloudFront/latest/DeveloperGuide/high_availability_origin_failover.html A. Wrong, one bucket has been added as origin already. B. We're not using Route 53. C. We're not using Route 53. D. Correct, we have to add the new bucket as an origin. E. We setup a CloudFront origin group with us-east-1 bucket and ap-southeast-1 as the secondary.

DE https://docs.aws.amazon.com/AmazonCloudFront/latest/DeveloperGuide/high_availability_origin_failover.html

B and E is the answer

agree with D and E, for E to work you need another origin so D must be paired with it. A only adds the bucket into the same origin so in the end there is only one origin and does not help with HA

B&E is the right answer.

Route 53 failover is not required if using the origin group. The DNS (route53 or otherwise) can point to the e single CloudFront service which is doing active-passive config in backend using define origin group points.

there should be some kind of mechanism for routing the traffic to replica in case of failover i think BE

https://docs.aws.amazon.com/AmazonCloudFront/latest/DeveloperGuide/high_availability_origin_failover.html

D and E

The answer is D&E because: [...] To set up origin failover, you must have a distribution with at least two origins. Next, you create an origin group for your distribution that includes two origins, setting one as the primary. Finally, you create or update a cache behavior to use the origin group. [...] Source: https://docs.aws.amazon.com/AmazonCloudFront/latest/DeveloperGuide/high_availability_origin_failover.html

Quick question. What is the difference between A and D?

I feel that BE is correct as Route53 allows DNS resolution because CloudFront will display the two buckets' distribution URLs. Route53 receives the requests and forwards them to CF, CF then forwards the request to the buckets.

why are we using Route 53? B is wrong. IMO D&E are the correct answers

as it mention "combination" not which "scenarios will work", I am going with ED.

D&E are true.

https://docs.aws.amazon.com/cloudfront/latest/APIReference/API_OriginGroup.html: "An origin group includes two origins (a primary origin and a second origin to failover to) and a failover criteria that you specify" This supports E https://docs.aws.amazon.com/AmazonCloudFront/latest/DeveloperGuide/high_availability_origin_failover.html: "You can set up CloudFront with origin failover for scenarios that require high availability. To get started, you create an origin group with two origins: a primary and a secondary. If the primary origin is unavailable, or returns specific HTTP response status codes that indicate a failure, CloudFront automatically switches to the secondary origin. To set up origin failover, you must have a distribution with at least two origins. Next, you create an origin group for your distribution that includes two origins, setting one as the primary. " This supports D

D and E. You dont need R53 if using CF failover since the primary replicates to the secondary. Whe the primary is unavailable the CF fails over to secondary