Exam AWS Certified Solutions Architect - Associate SAA-C03 topic 1 question 239 discussion

A. Create an Amazon API Gateway REST API. Configure the method to use the Lambda function. Enable IAM authentication on the API. This option is the most operationally efficient as it allows you to use API Gateway to handle the HTTPS endpoint and also allows you to use IAM to authenticate the calls to the microservice. API Gateway also provides many additional features such as caching, throttling, and monitoring, which can be useful for a microservice.

The question specifically asks for the solution that is most operationally efficient, not necessarily the one with the most features (which is A). Option B—using a Lambda function URL with AWS_IAM authentication—is indeed the most operationally efficient because: 1) Minimal Configuration: Lambda function URLs are designed to quickly create HTTPS endpoints without the need for additional AWS services like API Gateway. 2) Built-in IAM Authentication: You can easily specify AWS_IAM as the authentication type directly, fulfilling the requirement without extra setup. 3) No Extra Overhead: Unlike API Gateway, there’s no need to manage complex API configurations, throttling settings, or additional API management features unless specifically required.

b is not suited for production so not operationnaly efficient

Lambda function URLs with AWS_IAM authentication provide the most streamlined and operationally efficient way to deploy a single Go Lambda function behind an HTTPS endpoint with IAM-based authentication for client calls. It minimizes the number of moving parts and configuration required, leading to easier management and lower potential for operational issues.

Use Lambda Function URLs for simplicity, low cost, and direct integration with IAM for authentication. If your microservice evolves to require more complex features, you can later integrate with API Gateway as needed. API Gateway can integrate with Lambda and enable IAM authentication, but it introduces more operational overhead and cost compared to a Lambda Function URL. It's unnecessary unless the application requires additional features like request validation, throttling, or custom authorizers.

Why is B better than A: Both options meet the requirements, but Lambda function URLs are simpler and involve less operational overhead compared to setting up and managing an API Gateway, so B for sure.

B is the most operationally efficient solution. It provides the necessary functionality with minimal setup and cost, directly supports IAM authentication, and avoids the additional complexity and overhead associated with other options. This approach is particularly suitable for scenarios where the API requirements are straightforward and do not need the advanced features provided by API Gateway or CloudFront.

I think from a decoupllng and separation of concerns A is the answer. You dont want to have a heavy reliance on the Lambda function with you have specific services for what is being required. there is operationally efficient incorrect and operationally efficient correct. So A is the best answer.

According to this statement "MOST operationally efficient way" and the following link related to Lambda Function URL security: https://docs.aws.amazon.com/lambda/latest/dg/urls-auth.html

I originally voted B but after reading this article, I am not sure if A is wrong or is just badly worded. If A actually said "Configure the [authorization] method to use the Lambda function" then it would be way more logical than B but this could be intentional. Although I think this is AWS test not IELTS so picking right answers based on small word mistakes is not the intention! https://docs.aws.amazon.com/apigateway/latest/developerguide/http-api-lambda-authorizer.html

A& B are all good. The requirement is most operationally efficient so B is faster. In real life, I won't risk B for production, dev & test makes sense but no production please

I think this question has 2 answers as both A and B will work. However, B is more operationally efficient due to Lambda function URL and direct support for AWS_IAM as the auth type for this setup. https://docs.aws.amazon.com/lambda/latest/dg/urls-auth.html#urls-auth-iam C, D are not operationally efficient and GO is not supported on Lambda@Edge or CloudFront functions. Even if AWS start supporting it, the operational efficiency with increase because of CloudFront

We know that the application provides "an HTTPS endpoint" but we don't even know whether it is a REST API. The question is not mentioning any other requirements besides IAM authentication, which can be handled by Lambda alone. A would work, but would be an additional processing step (lowering operational efficiency). It would also provide benefits but none of those is asked for in the question. C and D is wrong because Lambda@Edge does not support Go.

Options B, C, and D involve using Lambda function URLs or CloudFront, but they lack the full set of features provided by API Gateway, such as built-in IAM authentication, throttling, and other API management capabilities.

I think it is B - most operationally efficient. A is a better answer, but more complicated.

There is no need of an additional API gateway when Lambda itself can support the need. This is more operationally efficient.

Why not B? I agree that A is a nice choice, but it clearly says "MOST operationally efficient way", there is nothing said about API. B in this case suits absolutely fine, it's simpler and cheaper.