A web design company currently runs several FTP servers that their 250 customers use to upload and
download large graphic files They wish to move this system to AWS to make it more scalable, but they wish to
maintain customer privacy and Keep costs to a minimum. What AWS architecture would you recommend?
A.
ASK their customers to use an S3 client instead of an FTP client. Create a single S3 bucket Create an IAM
user for each customer Put the IAM Users in a Group that has an IAM policy that permits access to subdirectories within the bucket via use of the ‘username’ Policy variable.
B.
Create a single S3 bucket with Reduced Redundancy Storage turned on and ask their customers to use an
S3 client instead of an FTP client Create a bucket for each customer with a Bucket Policy that permits
access only to that one customer.
C.
Create an auto-scaling group of FTP servers with a scaling policy to automatically scale-in when minimum
network traffic on the auto-scaling group is below a given threshold. Load a central list of ftp users from S3
as part of the user Data startup script on each Instance.
D.
Create a single S3 bucket with Requester Pays turned on and ask their customers to use an S3 client
instead of an FTP client Create a bucket tor each customer with a Bucket Policy that permits access only to
that one customer.
Explanation:
In question we have keywords `scalable’ and company wants to `move systems’ to aws, which is best suited for
Auto- scaling group.
D should be correct..
0
0
I will go with A…
0
0
A
0
0
A
First of all we need to look at 2 things: maintain customer privacy and keep minimum cost.
We can exclude B and D first, we don’t need to create a bucket for EACH customer, that doesn’t keep minimum cost.
That leaves us with A and C. Auto-scaling for several FTP servers make sense, but it might be higher cost than using S3 and IAM user. So i would go with A.
2
0
you nailed. Exact answer buddy. Cheers.
0
3
Definitely A
http://docs.aws.amazon.com/AmazonS3/latest/dev/example-policies-s3.html#iam-policy-ex1
0
0
C because this must be scalable as well
1
1
A question somewhat tricky about the requirement from three corners.
1. They wish to move this system to AWS to make it more scalable
2. maintain customer privacy and
3. Keep costs to a minimum
A:=> Maintaining the Customer Privacy and No mentioned about how to save or reduce cost in S3
B:=> Creating bucket for each user is not a scalable model, also 100 buckets are a limit earlier without extending which has since changed link)
C:=> Expensive
D:=> Creating bucket for each user is not a scalable model, also 100 buckets are a limit earlier without extending which has since changed link)
The answer is A in my view.
1
0
Answer B does not mention 1 bucket per customer but “Create a single S3 bucket”.
As they need to control cost, I would go with B as reduced redundancy is a cheaper option (nowhere is mentioned if the data is critical to them)
0
0
My Bad, the answer is not well written. It is mentioned after “Create a bucket for each customer “
0
0
C
Actually C is correct if you read the question carefully.
They wish to move their existing FTP service to AWS, that is, a requirement is that their customers should be able to use the same FTP software in the new solution. All other alternatives only offer storing into S3 and not all FTP software can store to both FTP and S3.
If FTP wasn’t a requirement I would go with alternative A.
A bit confusing question though.
2
0
Nice thought about keeping the FTP interface, but it not said anywhere the clients cannot switch to S3. It says “move this system to AWS”,
doesn’t mean fork-lift it as is.
The answers are poorly formulated though,
A – mostly fit, I’d pick it. (if only add Reduced redundancy storage to it, would be perfect 🙂
B – unclear if using one bucket or one-per customer (not sustainable).
C is ruled out by “Keep costs to a minimum”,
D – bucket for each customer has few dis-advantages, aside of 100 buckets limit, inability to share the common data is another of them.
(some graphic files might be shared for many customers, fits in with minimal cost directive.)
2
0
D:
A: No privacy as everybody see all names
B: OK
C: Too expensive
D: LLike B but, User pays so it’s cheaper
0
0
C is correct and this is why:
” They wish to move this system to AWS” . So customer wish to keep what they have they do not want to use S3 client instead of http://FTP.They want to use FTP servers. you cant force them right?
0
0