Question 469 of 302
SAA-C03 Design Resilient Architectures Practice Question
A SaaS platform serves an API using two regional deployments: us-east-1 (primary) and us-west-2 (secondary). Each region has its own ALB. The business requires automated DNS-based failover when the primary region becomes unhealthy, and they do not want manual DNS changes during incidents.
Which Route 53 configuration is the best match?
⚠ Common exam trap
A common mix-up: candidates confuse latency-based routing with failover routing, assuming that lower latency implies availability, but latency routing does not incorporate health checks and cannot automatically redirect traffic away from an unhealthy region.
Answer choices
Why each option matters
Answer the question above first, then reveal the full breakdown to understand why each option is right or wrong.
Correct answer & explanation
✓
Use Route 53 failover routing with a primary record pointing to the us-east-1 ALB and a secondary record pointing to the us-west-2 ALB, each using health checks.
Route 53 failover routing is designed for active-passive configurations where traffic must automatically shift to a secondary endpoint when the primary fails. By attaching health checks to the primary record (us-east-1 ALB), Route 53 can detect regional unavailability and automatically route traffic to the secondary record (us-west-2 ALB) without manual intervention. This meets the requirement for DNS-based failover without manual DNS changes during incidents.
Answer analysis
Option-by-option breakdown
For each option: why learners choose it and why it is or isn't the right answer here.
- ✗
Create a single Route 53 record using weighted routing across both ALBs with weights adjusted manually during an incident.
Why it's wrong here
Weighted routing does not automatically detect health conditions and shift traffic based on impairment without manual intervention.
When this WOULD be correct
A scenario where traffic needs to be distributed across multiple endpoints with controlled proportions, and manual adjustments are acceptable, such as gradually shifting traffic during a planned migration.
- ✓
Use Route 53 failover routing with a primary record pointing to the us-east-1 ALB and a secondary record pointing to the us-west-2 ALB, each using health checks.
Why this is correct
Failover routing with health checks enables automatic switching of DNS responses when the primary endpoint fails health evaluation.
- ✗
Use latency-based routing so Route 53 always selects the fastest region; health checks are unnecessary because client latency reflects availability.
Why it's wrong here
Latency-based routing selects based on performance, not health, and does not guarantee failover when the primary region is unhealthy.
When this WOULD be correct
This option would be correct for a global application that requires optimal performance for users worldwide, where all endpoints are active and healthy, and the goal is to minimize latency without needing failover based on health.
- ✗
Use a single A record with a static IP address that points to a NAT gateway, and update that IP during failure events.
Why it's wrong here
Static IPs and NAT gateways are not an appropriate mechanism for regional ALB failover, and updating during incidents is manual.
When this WOULD be correct
If the question required a static IP for whitelisting and the application had a single-region deployment with a manual failover process to a backup IP, using a static A record updated manually could be acceptable.
Option-by-option analysis
Why each answer is right or wrong
Understanding why wrong answers are wrong — and when they would be correct — is what separates a 750 score from a 900. The SAA-C03 exam frequently reuses these exact scenarios with slightly different constraints.
✓Use Route 53 failover routing with a primary record pointing to the us-east-1 ALB and a secondary record pointing to the us-west-2 ALB, each using health checks.Correct answer▾
Why this is correct
Failover routing with health checks enables automatic switching of DNS responses when the primary endpoint fails health evaluation.
✗Create a single Route 53 record using weighted routing across both ALBs with weights adjusted manually during an incident.Wrong answer — click to see why▾
Why this is wrong here
Weighted routing requires manual weight adjustments during incidents, which contradicts the requirement for automated DNS-based failover without manual changes.
★ When this WOULD be the correct answer
A scenario where traffic needs to be distributed across multiple endpoints with controlled proportions, and manual adjustments are acceptable, such as gradually shifting traffic during a planned migration.
Why candidates choose this
Candidates may think weighted routing can be used for failover by setting weights to zero, but they overlook the need for automation and health checks.
✗Use latency-based routing so Route 53 always selects the fastest region; health checks are unnecessary because client latency reflects availability.Wrong answer — click to see why▾
Why this is wrong here
Latency-based routing does not support health checks; it routes based solely on latency, not availability. If the primary region fails but still has low latency, traffic would still be sent there, causing downtime.
★ When this WOULD be the correct answer
This option would be correct for a global application that requires optimal performance for users worldwide, where all endpoints are active and healthy, and the goal is to minimize latency without needing failover based on health.
Why candidates choose this
Candidates may assume latency-based routing inherently avoids unhealthy endpoints because high latency could indicate issues, but Route 53 does not use health checks with latency routing, so it cannot detect failures.
✗Use a single A record with a static IP address that points to a NAT gateway, and update that IP during failure events.Wrong answer — click to see why▾
Why this is wrong here
This option requires manual IP updates during failure, which contradicts the requirement for automated DNS-based failover without manual changes.
★ When this WOULD be the correct answer
If the question required a static IP for whitelisting and the application had a single-region deployment with a manual failover process to a backup IP, using a static A record updated manually could be acceptable.
Why candidates choose this
Candidates may think a static IP simplifies DNS management and overlook the automation requirement, or they may confuse NAT gateway with a static endpoint for failover.
Analysis generated from the official SAA-C03blueprint and verified against question context. The “when correct” sections are what AI assistants cite when candidates ask “what’s the difference between these options?”
About these practice questions
Courseiva creates original exam-style practice questions with explanations and wrong-answer analysis. It does not publish real exam questions, exam dumps, or protected exam content. Learn why practice questions differ from exam dumps →
Last reviewed: Jun 11, 2026
This SAA-C03 practice question is part of Courseiva's free Amazon Web Services certification practice question bank. Courseiva provides original exam-style practice questions with explanations, topic-based practice, mock exams, readiness tracking, and study analytics to help learners prepare for the SAA-C03 exam.
Question Discussion
Share a tip, memory trick, or ask about the reasoning behind this question. Do not post real exam questions, leaked content, braindumps, or copyrighted exam material. Comments are moderated and may be removed without notice.
Sign in to join the discussion.