A school district plans a months-long migration wave that will continuously replicate large application and database volumes into AWS. Which networking approach best supports bulk migration traffic compared with VPN-only?
Select an answer to reveal the explanation.
Short Explanation
A months-long moving van needs a highway, not a garden hose. Direct Connect gives that sustained, predictable pipe for bulk replication; VPN-only is the backup trail, not the main freight route.
Full Explanation
A school district planning a months-long migration wave that continuously replicates large application and database volumes into AWS needs more predictable bandwidth than VPN-only typically provides. Provision AWS Direct Connect to carry sustained bulk migration traffic so replication stays inside project windows and classroom systems cut over with less WAN contention. Relying solely on intermittent consumer broadband Site-to-Site VPN for the entire wave fails because bursty consumer links and VPN overhead struggle with sustained multi-terabyte replication for district portfolios. Disabling all private connectivity and pushing every replica over the public internet unencrypted fails confidentiality for student and staff data and abandons hybrid private paths. Using only Route 53 geolocation routing without any hybrid data path fails conceptually: DNS routing does not move bulk disk replicas. Exam caveat: Direct Connect is the preferred answer for sustained bulk migration traffic versus VPN-only. Operational check: order DX with appropriate capacity, keep VPN as backup during provisioning, measure replication throughput against wave schedules, encrypt in transit, and document the hybrid path in the school district migration runbook before locking cutover dates.