A web application co-located in two geographically distinct locations is experiencing degraded service in one of the locations. What is the most appropriate routing policy to implement in Amazon Route 53?

Answer options:

A.Geolocation routing policy
B.Weighted routing policy
C.Failover routing policy
D.Latency-based routing policy

Correct Answer – C
Failover routing policy is the most appropriate routing policy to implement because it will make it possible for traffic to be routed to the resource in good health and not to the one experiencing poor response times. Several instances can be configured.
https://docs.aws.amazon.com/Route53/latest/DeveloperGuide/routing-policy.html#routing-policy-failover
Option A is INCORRECT because the Geolocation routing policy is essential when traffic to the hosted resources is routed according to its originating source address.
https://docs.aws.amazon.com/Route53/latest/DeveloperGuide/routing-policy.html#routing-policy-geo
Option B is INCORRECT because a weighted routing policy can distribute request traffic amongst resources. But in this scenario, it would be undesirable and cumbersome to manually set weights (preferences) each time any resource is unhealthy. This will not be the most appropriate routing policy.
https://docs.aws.amazon.com/Route53/latest/DeveloperGuide/routing-policy.html#routing-policy-weighted
Option D is INCORRECT because latency-based routing policy allows for queries to be served by the resources with the shortest response times to the user’s location. The routing policy does not give the required functionality in the scenario.
https://docs.aws.amazon.com/Route53/latest/DeveloperGuide/routing-policy.html#routing-policy-latency