Exam ANS-C00 topic 1 question 32 discussion

Yes Its C

The accent in this question is 'minimize cost' and then 'while allowing the organization to expand' Obviously, with c and d is possible to expand (with d even more - no hard limits) With DX port hour (0.30 per h) and transfer rate 0.20 for each connection With Transit VPC 0.010 in each direction per connection ( see Figure 14.5, official study guide). So, my answer D

Correct Answer D

Correct Answer D

Obsolete question, if you ask me - since the best option does not actually appear (a Transit Gateway).

D because There is a limit of 10 VPCs per DX GW. And with 9 used, there is only 1 VPC room to grow per account. Not sure if this is enough growth for the question. I will assume not.

Answer C DGW is free, AWS don't charge for the data that pass though it. 11 DGWs,11 PVIF and associate each DGW with respective accounts VGWs

Multi-account support for AWS Direct Connect gateway is a feature that allows you to associate up to 10 Amazon Virtual Private Clouds (Amazon VPCs) or up to three AWS Transit Gateways from multiple AWS accounts with an AWS Direct Connect gateway I will go for C

The only reason I would go for D is because of the phrase "enabling it to grow?" If we choose C there will not be further growth. But in terms of saving and management overhead C would be an attractive answer.

I will go with C

D is Correct.

Here is what I thought. Firstly, the question did not mention if inter-VPC communication requires. Secondly, the key component is Direct Connect. For those reasons, it would be much more rational to assume that the organization aims to leverage its existing Direct Connect to expand the communication between on-prem and all the VPCs across the accounts. As a result, option#C seems to be an ideal answer than others.

With D -> We got license fee: 2* ($0.21 to $8.40) + 0.1$ *99 (data to spoken VPC) per hour. We by-pass the encryption fee but need good VPN machines because we have so many connections (AWS VPN max 50). With C -> 1*0.33$ (DCX port h) + 0.02$*11 Both are OK about technical and expandable. So the key is minimize the cost -> I go with C, even D has a clear topo and better for expansion.

C is not proper. Connect a private VIF to an AWS Direct Connect gateway in each account. Connect the gateway in each account to the VPCs. You don't need to create each Direct Connect Gateway for each account. Just one account has DX Gateway then connect to all VPCs (even cross-account). Please refer to the link https://docs.aws.amazon.com/directconnect/latest/UserGuide/direct-connect-gateways-intro.html If you create each DX Gateway for each account, you also need corresponding number of DX connection

C. I have on DXGW per account (hard limit of 200 DXCW per account) total of 11 DXGW. Virtual Interface per AWS Direct Connect Gateway 30 - hard limit. For this scenario I have 1 VIF per account for a total of 11 VIFs. I can use one VIF with one direct connect gateway to connect up to 10 VPCs. Total: 11 DXGW 11 Private VIFs FAQ Direct Connect Gateway https://aws.amazon.com/directconnect/faqs/ : You can share a private virtual interface to interface with up to ten Virtual Private Clouds (VPCs) to reduce the number of Border Gateway Protocol sessions between your on-premises network and AWS deployments.

Guys, C is obviously not correct. Stop debating. There is a hard limit of 50 VIFs for each DX connection. Cannot be done for 99 VPCs. Impossible. Now the recommended way is a transit gw. but transit VPC achieve the same.

I will go with D It is presented that way on Udemy course "Clear and Simple AWS Advanced Networking 2020", lecture 89