How to Connect Multiple VPCs Across Accounts to On-Premises with High Availability?
A company hosts infrastructure services in multiple VPCs across multiple accounts in the us-west-2 Region. The VPC CIDR blocks do not overlap. The company wants to connect the VPCs to its data centers by using AWS Site-to-Site VPN tunnels. The connections must be encrypted in transit. Additionally, the connection from each data center must route to the closest AWS edge location. The connections must be highly available and must accommodate automatic failover. Which solution will meet these requirements?
Community Votes
100% of anonymous learners picked answer A. Votes are pick records left by other test-takers — they are not the verified answer.
Community Insight
The key requirements are multi-account connectivity, VPN acceleration, and automatic failover — which mandates BGP dynamic routing over static routing and a Transit Gateway over standalone Virtual Private Gateways.
This question tests the architecture for connecting multiple VPCs across AWS accounts to on-premises data centers using AWS Transit Gateway, Site-to-Site VPN with acceleration, and BGP dynamic routing for automatic failover. Community consensus strongly supports Option A.
Candidates often choose Option C, which is nearly identical to A but uses static routing instead of BGP. Static routing does not support automatic failover as effectively as BGP, which dynamically detects tunnel failures and reroutes traffic.
Community Discussion (4 comments)
Comments & Corrections
No comments yet — spotted an error or have a note? Share it below.
Expert Analysis
This question requires you to satisfy several requirements simultaneously: multi-account VPC connectivity, encrypted Site-to-Site VPN, routing to the closest AWS edge location, high availability, and automatic failover.
Why Option A is Correct
Option A uses a Transit Gateway (TGW) shared across accounts via AWS Resource Access Manager (RAM), which is the AWS best practice for hub-and-spoke multi-account networking. Each service account creates a VPC attachment to the TGW. The TGW then serves as the central point for Site-to-Site VPN tunnel attachments.
Critically, Option A enables VPN acceleration, which uses AWS Global Accelerator edge locations to route traffic to the closest AWS point of presence, satisfying the "closest edge location" requirement. It also configures BGP dynamic routing, which provides automatic failover — when one tunnel goes down, BGP converges and traffic seamlessly shifts to the remaining tunnel.
Why Option C is Wrong
Option C is almost identical to A but uses static routing instead of BGP. While static routing can work with VPN, it does not provide the same level of automatic failover capability. BGP continuously monitors tunnel health and dynamically adjusts routes, making it the correct choice for the high availability and automatic failover requirement.
Why Options B and D are Wrong
Options B and D deploy Virtual Private Gateways (VGW) in each account instead of using a Transit Gateway. This approach does not scale well for multi-account architectures and makes centralized management difficult. Additionally, VPN acceleration is not supported on standalone Virtual Private Gateways — it is only available when the VPN is attached to a Transit Gateway. This immediately disqualifies both B and D.
Community Consensus
As noted by community members, the combination of BGP for automatic failover and Transit Gateway for acceleration support clearly points to Option A. The distinction between A and C comes down entirely to dynamic vs. static routing.
Official Reference
Exam Strategy
When you see 'automatic failover' combined with AWS VPN, always look for BGP dynamic routing. Also remember that VPN acceleration is only available on Transit Gateway attachments, not on standalone Virtual Private Gateways — this is a common trap in AWS networking questions.
Related Analysis
Practice All ANS-C01 Questions
Access 137 questions with complete answers and detailed explanations.
View Full ANS-C01 Practice Test →