Route 53 Failover practice questions

A regional web application for a content publishing system must fail over automatically to a secondary Region if the primary endpoint becomes unhealthy. Which two services or features are required?

Trap 1: AWS Organizations service control policies

SCPs enforce permissions and do not provide regional failover.

Trap 2: S3 Transfer Acceleration

Transfer Acceleration improves upload paths to S3 but does not provide application failover.

A
AWS Organizations service control policies
Why wrong: SCPs enforce permissions and do not provide regional failover.
B
Route 53 failover routing with health checks
Route 53 can monitor endpoint health and return the standby endpoint when the primary is unhealthy.
C
S3 Transfer Acceleration
Why wrong: Transfer Acceleration improves upload paths to S3 but does not provide application failover.
D
A deployed standby application stack in the secondary Region
DNS failover requires a working target in the secondary Region.

Question 2mediummultiple choice

A company runs an internet-facing API in two AWS Regions. Route 53 currently uses simple routing to a primary Application Load Balancer (ALB) DNS name. When the primary Region experiences an outage, customers wait a long time because the DNS entry is not changed automatically.

The team wants automatic failover: if the primary Region ALB health check fails for a sustained period, Route 53 should route users to the secondary Region ALB.

Which Route 53 approach best meets this requirement?

Trap 1: Use latency-based routing so Route 53 automatically spreads traffic…

Latency-based routing changes where traffic goes based on latency, not on deterministic health-based failover. It may still send traffic to an unhealthy Region until latency measurements indicate otherwise.

Trap 2: Use weighted routing and configure the secondary ALB to receive…

Weighted routing does not natively switch weights based on ALB response codes with sustained unhealthy detection. You would still need a health-check-driven failover mechanism rather than relying on weighted distribution rules.

Trap 3: Use geolocation routing and restrict the primary Region record to…

Geolocation routing targets traffic by customer location. It does not inherently provide automatic health-based failover between Regions.

A
Use Route 53 failover routing with a PRIMARY and SECONDARY record set for the same name, and attach health checks to the ALBs.
Failover routing is designed for active/passive DNS failover. Route 53 evaluates health checks for the PRIMARY record and automatically serves the SECONDARY record when the PRIMARY is considered unhealthy for the configured evaluation period.
B
Use latency-based routing so Route 53 automatically spreads traffic to both Regions based on measured latency.
Why wrong: Latency-based routing changes where traffic goes based on latency, not on deterministic health-based failover. It may still send traffic to an unhealthy Region until latency measurements indicate otherwise.
C
Use weighted routing and configure the secondary ALB to receive 100% traffic when the primary returns HTTP 5xx responses.
Why wrong: Weighted routing does not natively switch weights based on ALB response codes with sustained unhealthy detection. You would still need a health-check-driven failover mechanism rather than relying on weighted distribution rules.
D
Use geolocation routing and restrict the primary Region record to specific countries only.
Why wrong: Geolocation routing targets traffic by customer location. It does not inherently provide automatic health-based failover between Regions.

Question 3easymultiple choice

A company runs the same public API in two regions (Region A and Region B), each fronted by an ALB. They want Route 53 to automatically route clients to the Region B API when Region A becomes unhealthy, with minimal configuration effort. Which Route 53 approach should they use?

Trap 1: Use a single Route 53 A record that points only to Region A’s ALB…

A single-record setup does not provide automatic failover and still requires manual changes during outages.

Trap 2: Use Route 53 latency-based routing with separate records for each…

Latency-based routing optimizes user proximity, but it does not automatically fail over based on health checks.

Trap 3: Use weighted routing and set the Region B weight to 0 to ensure it…

Weighted routing does not react to health status. Weight changes are not automatic failover responses.

A
Use a single Route 53 A record that points only to Region A’s ALB and manually update it after failures.
Why wrong: A single-record setup does not provide automatic failover and still requires manual changes during outages.
B
Use Route 53 latency-based routing with separate records for each region.
Why wrong: Latency-based routing optimizes user proximity, but it does not automatically fail over based on health checks.
C
Use Route 53 failover routing with health checks for each region’s endpoint.
Failover routing works with health checks to move traffic from a primary endpoint to a secondary endpoint when the primary becomes unhealthy.
D
Use weighted routing and set the Region B weight to 0 to ensure it is only used when needed.
Why wrong: Weighted routing does not react to health status. Weight changes are not automatic failover responses.

Question 4easymultiple choice

A company runs the same public API in two regions (Region A and Region B), each fronted by an ALB. They want Route 53 to automatically route clients to the Region B API when Region A becomes unhealthy, with minimal configuration effort. Which Route 53 approach should they use?

Trap 1: Use a single Route 53 A record that points only to Region A’s ALB…

A single-record setup does not provide automatic failover and still requires manual changes during outages.

Trap 2: Use Route 53 latency-based routing with separate records for each…

Latency-based routing optimizes user proximity, but it does not automatically fail over based on health checks.

Trap 3: Use weighted routing and set the Region B weight to 0 to ensure it…

Weighted routing does not react to health status. Weight changes are not automatic failover responses.

A
Use a single Route 53 A record that points only to Region A’s ALB and manually update it after failures.
Why wrong: A single-record setup does not provide automatic failover and still requires manual changes during outages.
B
Use Route 53 latency-based routing with separate records for each region.
Why wrong: Latency-based routing optimizes user proximity, but it does not automatically fail over based on health checks.
C
Use Route 53 failover routing with health checks for each region’s endpoint.
Failover routing works with health checks to move traffic from a primary endpoint to a secondary endpoint when the primary becomes unhealthy.
D
Use weighted routing and set the Region B weight to 0 to ensure it is only used when needed.
Why wrong: Weighted routing does not react to health status. Weight changes are not automatic failover responses.

Question 5mediummulti select

A SaaS application is deployed in us-east-1 and us-west-2 behind separate ALBs. The business wants DNS to send new clients to the primary Region when it is healthy and automatically fail over to the secondary Region when the primary endpoint is unhealthy. Which two Route 53 settings are required? Select two.

Trap 1: Use weighted routing with a 50/50 traffic split between both…

Weighted routing distributes traffic, but it does not automatically fail over based on endpoint health.

Trap 2: Use latency-based routing so clients always choose the fastest…

Latency-based routing optimizes performance, but it is not the same as primary-secondary failover behavior.

Trap 3: Use a geolocation policy without health checks.

Geolocation routes by user location and still requires additional health-aware design for automatic failover.

A
Use a failover routing policy with a primary and secondary record.
Failover routing is designed specifically to send traffic to a secondary endpoint when the primary becomes unhealthy.
B
Create a health check and associate it with the primary endpoint.
Health checks give Route 53 the signal it needs to decide when the primary endpoint should stop receiving answers.
C
Use weighted routing with a 50/50 traffic split between both Regions.
Why wrong: Weighted routing distributes traffic, but it does not automatically fail over based on endpoint health.
D
Use latency-based routing so clients always choose the fastest Region.
Why wrong: Latency-based routing optimizes performance, but it is not the same as primary-secondary failover behavior.
E
Use a geolocation policy without health checks.
Why wrong: Geolocation routes by user location and still requires additional health-aware design for automatic failover.

Question 6mediummultiple choice

An internal-facing application is available in two AWS regions (Region 1 and Region 2). Each region has its own Application Load Balancer (ALB) and target group. The company uses an AWS Route 53 private hosted zone to route clients to Region 1 by default, but it must automatically fail over to Region 2 when Region 1’s ALB is unhealthy. Which Route 53 design best meets this requirement?

Trap 1: Use latency-based routing with two alias records; Route 53 will…

Latency-based routing selects the record with the lowest measured latency. It does not provide deterministic failover based on health check status, so traffic may continue to be routed to an unhealthy ALB if it has lower latency.

Trap 2: Use weighted routing with weights 100/0 and update weights manually…

Weighted routing changes traffic distribution only when weights are changed. Manual updates are not automatic failover and can introduce delays and operational risk during incidents.

Trap 3: Use geolocation routing with a single alias record for Region 1,…

Geolocation and EDNS Client Subnet affect which record is returned based on client location/network information. They do not evaluate ALB health and therefore cannot trigger automatic regional failover.

A
Use latency-based routing with two alias records; Route 53 will automatically shift traffic away from the unhealthy region.
Why wrong: Latency-based routing selects the record with the lowest measured latency. It does not provide deterministic failover based on health check status, so traffic may continue to be routed to an unhealthy ALB if it has lower latency.
B
Use weighted routing with weights 100/0 and update weights manually after detecting failures.
Why wrong: Weighted routing changes traffic distribution only when weights are changed. Manual updates are not automatic failover and can introduce delays and operational risk during incidents.
C
Use failover routing with two alias A records for the same name: one PRIMARY and one SECONDARY, both pointing to each region’s ALB; attach the health check to the PRIMARY record.
Failover routing uses health checks to determine which record Route 53 should return. By creating PRIMARY and SECONDARY alias records and associating a health check with the PRIMARY ALB endpoint, Route 53 can automatically stop routing to Region 1 when the health check fails and route to Region 2 until Region 1 recovers.
D
Use geolocation routing with a single alias record for Region 1, and enable EDNS Client Subnet to detect unhealthy endpoints.
Why wrong: Geolocation and EDNS Client Subnet affect which record is returned based on client location/network information. They do not evaluate ALB health and therefore cannot trigger automatic regional failover.

Question 7mediummultiple choice

Based on the exhibit, the company wants DNS traffic to fail over automatically from the primary Region to a secondary Region when the primary endpoint is unhealthy. Which Route 53 change is best?

Exhibit

Route 53 record set
  Name: app.example.com
  Type: A (Alias)
  Routing policy: Simple
  Alias target: alb-primary-123.us-east-1.elb.amazonaws.com
  TTL: 60 seconds
Health check
  ID: hc-44
  Status: Inactive
Secondary environment
  ALB target exists in us-west-2: alb-secondary-456.us-west-2.elb.amazonaws.com
Operational note
  A Region outage should shift users to the secondary ALB without manual DNS changes.

Trap 1: Keep simple routing and lower the TTL to 10 seconds.

A lower TTL can make clients refresh cached answers sooner, but simple routing still returns only one endpoint and does not provide primary/secondary failover behavior. It does not automatically switch traffic to the standby Region when the primary becomes unhealthy.

Trap 2: Use weighted routing with equal weights for both ALBs.

Weighted routing is useful for traffic splitting or gradual migration, but it is not the same as health-based disaster recovery. Equal weights do not create a primary endpoint with an automatic standby that is used only on failure.

Trap 3: Use geolocation routing so users in each continent reach a closer…

Geolocation routing makes decisions based on user location, not on endpoint health or Regional disaster recovery. It is not designed to shift all traffic away from an unhealthy primary Region.

A
Keep simple routing and lower the TTL to 10 seconds.
Why wrong: A lower TTL can make clients refresh cached answers sooner, but simple routing still returns only one endpoint and does not provide primary/secondary failover behavior. It does not automatically switch traffic to the standby Region when the primary becomes unhealthy.
B
Use weighted routing with equal weights for both ALBs.
Why wrong: Weighted routing is useful for traffic splitting or gradual migration, but it is not the same as health-based disaster recovery. Equal weights do not create a primary endpoint with an automatic standby that is used only on failure.
C
Use geolocation routing so users in each continent reach a closer ALB.
Why wrong: Geolocation routing makes decisions based on user location, not on endpoint health or Regional disaster recovery. It is not designed to shift all traffic away from an unhealthy primary Region.
D
Create Route 53 failover records with health checks for the primary and secondary ALBs.
Failover routing is the Route 53 policy intended for this use case. Route 53 returns the primary record while its health check passes, and automatically serves the secondary record when the primary health check fails. That provides DNS-based Regional failover without manual intervention.

Question 8mediummultiple choice

You host a public API using Amazon API Gateway in two AWS Regions: us-east-1 (primary) and us-west-2 (secondary). You want Route 53 to send client traffic to the secondary region only when the primary API is unhealthy. Which Route 53 setup best meets this requirement?

Trap 1: Use latency-based routing with one routing policy per region, and…

Latency-based routing distributes traffic based on DNS latency measurements, not health. Weight changes driven by alarms require additional automation and are not inherently “health-check driven” failover.

Trap 2: Use weighted routing across both regions and rely on Route 53…

Weighted routing does not inherently change weights based on health checks by itself. Changing weights based on health typically requires additional automation (for example, updating the record values).

Trap 3: Use geolocation routing to map some client geographies to the…

Geolocation routing chooses answers based on where the resolver/client is located, not on whether the primary endpoint is healthy.

A
Use latency-based routing with one routing policy per region, and use CloudWatch alarms to update traffic weights between regions.
Why wrong: Latency-based routing distributes traffic based on DNS latency measurements, not health. Weight changes driven by alarms require additional automation and are not inherently “health-check driven” failover.
B
Use Route 53 failover routing with two ALIAS records (same DNS name) pointing to the API Gateway regional endpoints: one record is configured as PRIMARY with an associated health check, and the other is configured as SECONDARY.
Failover routing is designed for active-passive regional resiliency. With a PRIMARY record tied to a health check, Route 53 automatically returns DNS answers to the SECONDARY endpoint when the PRIMARY fails health checks.
C
Use weighted routing across both regions and rely on Route 53 health checks to automatically set the secondary to 100% weight when the primary fails.
Why wrong: Weighted routing does not inherently change weights based on health checks by itself. Changing weights based on health typically requires additional automation (for example, updating the record values).
D
Use geolocation routing to map some client geographies to the secondary region and the rest to the primary region.
Why wrong: Geolocation routing chooses answers based on where the resolver/client is located, not on whether the primary endpoint is healthy.

Question 9easymultiple choice

Your company hosts an internal API in two AWS Regions. You want Amazon Route 53 to automatically send traffic to the secondary Region if the primary Region’s endpoint becomes unhealthy. Which Route 53 configuration best meets this requirement?

Trap 1: Latency-based routing with health checks for both Regions.

Latency-based routing chooses the Region primarily based on measured latency. Health checks can remove an endpoint from routing if unhealthy, but it does not guarantee that all traffic switches to a specific secondary Region as a deliberate primary/backup failover policy.

Trap 2: Weighted routing to distribute traffic evenly across both Regions.

Weighted routing sends a configured percentage of traffic to each Region under normal conditions. Even if one endpoint becomes unhealthy, weighted routing by itself does not implement a strict “switch all traffic to the secondary when primary fails” pattern without additional failover-specific configuration.

Trap 3: Geolocation routing based on the client’s country to choose a…

Geolocation routing selects endpoints based on where the user is located, not based on the health of the primary Region’s endpoint. It does not provide health-based regional failover.

A
Latency-based routing with health checks for both Regions.
Why wrong: Latency-based routing chooses the Region primarily based on measured latency. Health checks can remove an endpoint from routing if unhealthy, but it does not guarantee that all traffic switches to a specific secondary Region as a deliberate primary/backup failover policy.
B
Failover routing with a primary record associated with a health check, and a secondary (failover) record associated with its own health check settings.
Route 53 failover routing is explicitly designed for primary/secondary behavior. When the primary record’s health check fails, Route 53 automatically routes to the secondary (failover) record, matching the stated requirement.
C
Weighted routing to distribute traffic evenly across both Regions.
Why wrong: Weighted routing sends a configured percentage of traffic to each Region under normal conditions. Even if one endpoint becomes unhealthy, weighted routing by itself does not implement a strict “switch all traffic to the secondary when primary fails” pattern without additional failover-specific configuration.
D
Geolocation routing based on the client’s country to choose a Region.
Why wrong: Geolocation routing selects endpoints based on where the user is located, not based on the health of the primary Region’s endpoint. It does not provide health-based regional failover.

Question 10mediummultiple choice

Your web application is deployed in two AWS Regions (Region A and Region B). You want Route 53 to automatically fail over DNS traffic from Region A to Region B when Region A is unhealthy.

The failover decision must be based on health checks that verify whether the application in Region A is reachable.

Which Route 53 routing configuration best meets these requirements?

Trap 1: Latency-based routing with regional aliases to split traffic based…

Latency-based routing selects answers based on request latency, not on health check status. If Region A becomes unhealthy, Route 53 does not automatically switch all traffic to Region B based solely on latency.

Trap 2: Geolocation routing using country-based routing policies.

Geolocation routing chooses records based on the geography of the client. It does not use health checks to determine which region to return during an outage.

Trap 3: Weighted routing with weights set to 100 for Region A and 0 for…

Weighted routing splits traffic based on configured weights, but it does not automatically change weights in response to health checks. You would still need external automation to detect failure and update weights.

A
Latency-based routing with regional aliases to split traffic based on measured latency.
Why wrong: Latency-based routing selects answers based on request latency, not on health check status. If Region A becomes unhealthy, Route 53 does not automatically switch all traffic to Region B based solely on latency.
B
Geolocation routing using country-based routing policies.
Why wrong: Geolocation routing chooses records based on the geography of the client. It does not use health checks to determine which region to return during an outage.
C
Failover routing using a primary record with an associated health check for Region A and a secondary record for Region B.
Route 53 failover routing is designed for active/standby patterns. You configure the Region A record as primary with a health check. When that health check fails, Route 53 automatically returns the Region B (secondary) record, enabling health-check-driven regional failover.
D
Weighted routing with weights set to 100 for Region A and 0 for Region B.
Why wrong: Weighted routing splits traffic based on configured weights, but it does not automatically change weights in response to health checks. You would still need external automation to detect failure and update weights.

Question 11mediummultiple choice

Your public API is hosted in two regions. You want Route 53 to automatically send traffic to the secondary region when the primary region’s endpoint fails. The primary API health check is returning failure codes, but clients still reach the primary region for several minutes. Which Route 53 configuration most directly addresses this behavior?

Trap 1: Use a single Alias A record with simple routing and a short TTL so…

Simple routing with an Alias record does not perform health-check-based switching to a different endpoint/record set. TTL affects caching duration, but it does not implement failover logic.

Trap 2: Use weighted routing to send a small percentage of traffic to the…

Weighted routing distributes traffic but does not automatically switch based on health. Manual changes introduce delay and operational dependencies.

Trap 3: Use latency routing only, letting Route 53 choose the…

Latency routing optimizes for latency and does not provide deterministic failover semantics based on endpoint health. If the primary is unhealthy but still resolves, clients can keep being directed there.

A
Use a single Alias A record with simple routing and a short TTL so Route 53 quickly changes the IP address.
Why wrong: Simple routing with an Alias record does not perform health-check-based switching to a different endpoint/record set. TTL affects caching duration, but it does not implement failover logic.
B
Use Route 53 failover routing with a primary record and a secondary record, each associated with its own health check, so Route 53 answers with the healthy region.
Failover routing is designed for this: Route 53 evaluates health checks and returns the primary record while it is healthy. When the primary health check fails, Route 53 automatically returns the secondary record. Note that clients may still see traffic for a few minutes due to DNS caching, but failover routing is the configuration that enables automatic region switching.
C
Use weighted routing to send a small percentage of traffic to the secondary region, increasing it manually when the primary fails.
Why wrong: Weighted routing distributes traffic but does not automatically switch based on health. Manual changes introduce delay and operational dependencies.
D
Use latency routing only, letting Route 53 choose the lowest-latency region at query time, without health checks.
Why wrong: Latency routing optimizes for latency and does not provide deterministic failover semantics based on endpoint health. If the primary is unhealthy but still resolves, clients can keep being directed there.

Question 12mediummulti select

A SaaS application is deployed in us-east-1 and us-west-2 behind separate ALBs. The business wants DNS to send new clients to the primary Region when it is healthy and automatically fail over to the secondary Region when the primary endpoint is unhealthy. Which two Route 53 settings are required? Select two.

Trap 1: Use weighted routing with a 50/50 traffic split between both…

Weighted routing distributes traffic, but it does not automatically fail over based on endpoint health.

Trap 2: Use latency-based routing so clients always choose the fastest…

Latency-based routing optimizes performance, but it is not the same as primary-secondary failover behavior.

Trap 3: Use a geolocation policy without health checks.

Geolocation routes by user location and still requires additional health-aware design for automatic failover.

A
Use a failover routing policy with a primary and secondary record.
Failover routing is designed specifically to send traffic to a secondary endpoint when the primary becomes unhealthy.
B
Create a health check and associate it with the primary endpoint.
Health checks give Route 53 the signal it needs to decide when the primary endpoint should stop receiving answers.
C
Use weighted routing with a 50/50 traffic split between both Regions.
Why wrong: Weighted routing distributes traffic, but it does not automatically fail over based on endpoint health.
D
Use latency-based routing so clients always choose the fastest Region.
Why wrong: Latency-based routing optimizes performance, but it is not the same as primary-secondary failover behavior.
E
Use a geolocation policy without health checks.
Why wrong: Geolocation routes by user location and still requires additional health-aware design for automatic failover.

Question 13mediummulti select

An internal API is deployed in two AWS Regions behind separate Application Load Balancers. The company wants clients to use the primary Region when it is healthy and automatically switch to the secondary Region if the primary health check fails. Which two Route 53 record configurations are required? Select two.

Trap 1: Create a weighted record set that sends 50 percent of traffic to…

Weighted routing is useful for splitting traffic or testing, but it does not provide the strict primary-versus-secondary behavior required for automatic failover.

Trap 2: Create a latency-based record set so Route 53 always prefers the…

Latency-based routing chooses the nearest or fastest endpoint for each client request. That is different from a deliberate active-passive design where one Region is primary and another is only used when the primary fails.

Trap 3: Create a multivalue answer record to return both ALB addresses on…

Multivalue answers can improve availability by returning multiple healthy values, but they do not implement the explicit primary-to-secondary failover pattern described in the scenario.

A
Create a primary failover record that points to the primary ALB and associates a Route 53 health check.
A primary failover record is the active answer while the primary Region remains healthy. The associated health check tells Route 53 when the primary endpoint should stop being returned to clients.
B
Create a weighted record set that sends 50 percent of traffic to each Region.
Why wrong: Weighted routing is useful for splitting traffic or testing, but it does not provide the strict primary-versus-secondary behavior required for automatic failover.
C
Create a secondary failover record that points to the secondary ALB.
The secondary failover record gives Route 53 the alternate destination to return when the primary health check fails. This is the fallback endpoint used only when the primary is unhealthy.
D
Create a latency-based record set so Route 53 always prefers the fastest Region.
Why wrong: Latency-based routing chooses the nearest or fastest endpoint for each client request. That is different from a deliberate active-passive design where one Region is primary and another is only used when the primary fails.
E
Create a multivalue answer record to return both ALB addresses on each lookup.
Why wrong: Multivalue answers can improve availability by returning multiple healthy values, but they do not implement the explicit primary-to-secondary failover pattern described in the scenario.

Question 14mediummultiple choice

A company hosts a web application on EC2 instances behind an Application Load Balancer (ALB) in us-east-1. A static failover site is hosted in an S3 bucket with static website hosting enabled. The company needs automatic DNS failover to the S3 bucket if the primary ALB becomes unhealthy. Which Route 53 configuration achieves this?

Trap 1: Configure Route 53 Weighted routing with 100% weight on the ALB and…

Weighted routing splits traffic by percentage. A 0% weight record is never served. Weighted routing does not switch to the secondary when the primary is unhealthy.

Trap 2: Configure Route 53 Latency routing with records in both regions to…

Latency routing routes to the lowest-latency endpoint for each client — it does not implement primary/secondary failover to a specific static site backup.

Trap 3: Configure Route 53 Geolocation routing with North American users…

Geolocation routing directs traffic by user location, not resource health. North American users would always go to the ALB even when it is unhealthy.

A
Configure Route 53 Failover routing with a health check on the ALB as PRIMARY and the S3 bucket website endpoint as SECONDARY
Failover routing with a health-checked PRIMARY (ALB) and SECONDARY (S3) provides automatic DNS switchover. When the ALB health check fails, Route 53 returns the S3 endpoint automatically.
B
Configure Route 53 Weighted routing with 100% weight on the ALB and 0% on the S3 bucket
Why wrong: Weighted routing splits traffic by percentage. A 0% weight record is never served. Weighted routing does not switch to the secondary when the primary is unhealthy.
C
Configure Route 53 Latency routing with records in both regions to route to the healthiest endpoint
Why wrong: Latency routing routes to the lowest-latency endpoint for each client — it does not implement primary/secondary failover to a specific static site backup.
D
Configure Route 53 Geolocation routing with North American users directed to the ALB and all others to S3
Why wrong: Geolocation routing directs traffic by user location, not resource health. North American users would always go to the ALB even when it is unhealthy.

Question 15hardmulti select

A regional web application for a inventory service must fail over automatically to a secondary Region if the primary endpoint becomes unhealthy. Which two services or features are required? The design must avoid adding custom operational scripts.

Trap 1: S3 Transfer Acceleration

Transfer Acceleration improves upload paths to S3 but does not provide application failover.

Trap 2: AWS Organizations service control policies

SCPs enforce permissions and do not provide regional failover.

A
Route 53 failover routing with health checks
Route 53 can monitor endpoint health and return the standby endpoint when the primary is unhealthy.
B
S3 Transfer Acceleration
Why wrong: Transfer Acceleration improves upload paths to S3 but does not provide application failover.
C
A deployed standby application stack in the secondary Region
DNS failover requires a working target in the secondary Region.
D
AWS Organizations service control policies
Why wrong: SCPs enforce permissions and do not provide regional failover.

Question 16mediummulti select

A company is designing a disaster recovery plan for a critical application hosted on AWS. The application runs on EC2 instances with data stored in Amazon EBS volumes and Amazon S3. The recovery time objective (RTO) is 15 minutes, and the recovery point objective (RPO) is 1 hour. Which three strategies would help meet these objectives? (Choose three.)

Question 17mediummulti select

A company is designing a multi-Region disaster recovery (DR) strategy for a stateless web application running on Amazon EC2 instances behind an Application Load Balancer (ALB). The application uses an Amazon RDS for MySQL database as its data store. The architecture must provide rapid failover with the lowest possible Recovery Point Objective (RPO) and Recovery Time Objective (RTO). Which of the following design choices will help achieve these objectives? (Choose four.)

Question 18mediummulti select

A company runs a customer portal in us-east-1 and a warm standby in us-west-2. The DNS name must send users to us-east-1 while it is healthy and automatically switch to us-west-2 if the primary application endpoint stops responding. Which two actions should the architect take? Select two.

Trap 1: Use latency-based routing so Route 53 always returns the…

Latency-based routing improves performance selection, but it does not provide a simple primary-and-backup failover pattern. Users could still be routed to either Region based on latency, not health-driven standby behavior.

Trap 2: Use weighted records with a 50/50 split to balance traffic across…

Weighted routing is useful for traffic splitting and gradual migration, but it does not automatically behave like a failover policy. A 50/50 split would continue sending traffic to the unhealthy Region.

Trap 3: Place the standby application in a private hosted zone so only…

A private hosted zone restricts DNS visibility to associated VPCs, but it does not create internet-facing failover behavior. This choice solves name resolution scope, not automatic health-based regional switching.

A
Create Route 53 failover records for the same DNS name with primary and secondary targets.
Failover routing is the Route 53 feature built for primary-to-secondary traffic shifting. It lets DNS answer with the primary target while health checks pass, then returns the secondary target when the primary becomes unhealthy.
B
Use latency-based routing so Route 53 always returns the lowest-latency Region.
Why wrong: Latency-based routing improves performance selection, but it does not provide a simple primary-and-backup failover pattern. Users could still be routed to either Region based on latency, not health-driven standby behavior.
C
Associate a Route 53 health check with the primary endpoint that monitors application availability.
A health check tells Route 53 whether the primary site is actually responding. Without it, Route 53 cannot reliably know when to stop returning the primary record and shift traffic to the backup endpoint.
D
Use weighted records with a 50/50 split to balance traffic across both Regions.
Why wrong: Weighted routing is useful for traffic splitting and gradual migration, but it does not automatically behave like a failover policy. A 50/50 split would continue sending traffic to the unhealthy Region.
E
Place the standby application in a private hosted zone so only internal systems can resolve it.
Why wrong: A private hosted zone restricts DNS visibility to associated VPCs, but it does not create internet-facing failover behavior. This choice solves name resolution scope, not automatic health-based regional switching.