Amazon Web Services Updated SAA-C03 Exam Questions and Answers by ryder

Amazon Kinesis Data Streams is the best choice for this scenario:

Message throughput: Kinesis Data Streams supports high throughput with enhanced fan-out and dedicated throughput for consumers.

Large message size: Supports message sizes up to 1 MB, meeting the 500 KB requirement.

Message retention: Data streams can retain messages for up to 365 days.

Strict ordering: Guarantees message ordering within shards.

Why Other Options Are Not Ideal:

Option B:

While SQS FIFO supports strict ordering, SNS topics do not. SNS also does not natively support message retention or strict ordering across consumers.Does not meet requirements.

Option C:

EventBridge does not provide strict ordering guarantees or message retention beyond 24 hours.Does not meet requirements.

Option D:

SNS topics with Data Firehose are not designed for use cases requiring strict ordering or long message retention.Does not meet requirements.

AWS References:

Amazon Kinesis Data Streams:AWS Documentation - Kinesis Data Streams

AWS Messaging Services Comparison:AWS Documentation - Messaging Services

Amazon EventBridge API destinations allow you to send data from AWS to external systems, like Salesforce, using HTTP APIs, including those secured with OAuth. This provides a secure and scalable solution for sending messages from the order processing application to Salesforce.

Option A and B (SNS): SNS is not ideal for OAuth-secured external APIs and lacks the necessary OAuth integration.

Option D (MSK): Amazon MSK is a Kafka-based streaming solution, which is overkill for simple message forwarding to Salesforce.

AWS References:

Amazon EventBridge API Destinations

Amazon API Gateway supports resource policies, which allow you to control access to your API by specifying the IP addresses or ranges that can access the API. By creating a resource policy that explicitly denies access to any IP address outside the allowed set, you can ensure that only trusted IP addresses (such as those from your internal network) can access the critical information in your API. This approach provides fine-grained access control without the need for additional infrastructure or complex configurations.

Option A (Private integration): API Gateway private integrations are for creating private APIs that are only accessible within a VPC, but this solution is about restricting access to certain IP addresses.

Option C (Private subnet and ACLs): Deploying the API in a private subnet and using network ACLs adds unnecessary complexity and isn't the best fit for HTTP APIs.

Option D (Security group): API Gateway doesn't have a security group because it isn't a resource inside a VPC. Instead, resource policies are the correct mechanism for controlling IP-based access.

AWS References:

Controlling Access to API Gateway with Resource Policies

The requirement is to route users to the nearest AWS Region where the application is deployed. The best solution is to use Amazon Route 53 with a geolocation routing policy, which routes traffic based on the geographic location of the user making the request.

Geolocation Routing: This routing policy ensures that users are directed to the resources (in this case, EC2 instances) that are geographically closest to them, thereby reducing latency and improving the user experience.

Application Load Balancer (ALB): Within each Region, an internet-facing Application Load Balancer (ALB) is used to distribute incoming traffic across multiple EC2 instances in different Availability Zones. ALBs are designed to handle HTTP/HTTPS traffic and provide advanced features like content-based routing, SSL termination, and user authentication.

Why Not Other Options?:

Option B (Geoproximity + NLB): Geoproximity routing is similar but more complex as it requires fine-tuning the proximity settings. A Network Load Balancer (NLB) is better suited for TCP/UDP traffic rather than HTTP/HTTPS.

Option C (Multivalue Answer Routing + ALB): Multivalue answer routing does not direct traffic based on user location but rather returns multiple values and lets the client choose. This does not meet the requirement for geographically routing users.

Option D (Weighted Routing + NLB): Weighted routing splits traffic based on predefined weights and does not consider the user's geographic location. NLB is not ideal for this scenario due to its focus on lower-level protocols.

AWS References:

Amazon Route 53 Routing Policies - Detailed explanation of the various routing policies available in Route 53, including geolocation.

Elastic Load Balancing - Information on the different types of load balancers in AWS and when to use them.