A company's social media application has strict data residency requirements. The company wants to use Amazon Route 53 to provide the application with DNS services. A SysOps administrator must…

Question

Options

• AConfigure a Route 53 latency routing policy.
• BConfigure a Route 53 multivalue answer routing policy.
• CConfigure a Route 53 geolocation routing policy.
• DConfigure a Route 53 IP-based routing policy.

• A
  10% (5)
• B
  6% (3)
• C
  81% (39)
• D
  2% (1)

Explanation

Geolocation routing (Option C) is correct because it routes traffic based on the geographic location of the user making the DNS query, allowing the company to enforce data residency by directing users in specific countries or continents to designated AWS Regions.

Why the distractors are wrong:

• A (Latency): Routes based on lowest network latency to an AWS Region, not the user's physical location - a user might get routed outside their required data residency boundary if a closer region is temporarily faster.
• B (Multivalue answer): Returns multiple IP addresses for load balancing/health checks but has no awareness of user location or geography.
• D (IP-based): Routes based on the client's IP address CIDR ranges that you manually specify - this requires maintaining your own CIDR-to-region mappings rather than relying on Route 53's built-in geographic awareness, making it operationally complex and not the right fit for a location-based data residency requirement.

Memory tip: Think "Geolocation = Geographic compliance." Any time you see data residency, GDPR, or legal jurisdiction in a question, geolocation routing is almost always the answer - it's the only policy that maps a user's where to a specific endpoint by country, continent, or US state.

No community discussion yet for this question.