A company wants to allow remote employees to securely connect to resources inside a VPC from their individual laptops. Which service is MOST suitable for this requirement?
A question asking to select the remote access method from employee devices to a VPC.
AWS Site-to-Site VPN
AWS Site-to-Site VPN connects an office or on-premises network to a VPC through an encrypted tunnel.
The unit of connection is network-to-network (site-to-site), not individual devices. Because this question requires a connection from each individual employee laptop, client-based AWS Client VPN is the appropriate choice. This is incorrect.
AWS Client VPN
This is correct. AWS Client VPN is a fully managed service that provides TLS-based VPN connectivity from individual devices (clients) to a VPC. It is designed for remote-access use cases such as work from home, and automatically scales as the number of users changes.
AWS Direct Connect
AWS Direct Connect is a service that connects a data center or on-premises facility to AWS through a dedicated physical line.
Physical provisioning is required, and it is not designed for individual laptops to connect remotely. This is incorrect.
Amazon Connect
Amazon Connect is a cloud-based contact center service for handling phone and chat inquiries.
Despite the similar name, it is not a network connectivity service and does not meet the requirement. This is incorrect.
There are two types of VPN: Client VPN = remote access from individual devices / Site-to-Site VPN = connecting sites (networks). When you see 'employee laptop' or 'remote work,' choose Client VPN. For site connections, Direct Connect is a dedicated physical line that does NOT traverse the internet (for stable bandwidth and low latency). Amazon Connect (contact center) is unrelated.