A company has a Direct Connect transit VIF to a transit gateway in the Europe (Paris) Region, and private workloads in VPCs attached to that transit gateway. The company acquired offices in Tokyo and needs to migrate those workloads to AWS in the Asia Pacific (Tokyo) Region within 5 days. The migrated workloads must be private (not internet-accessible) and must be able to access the Paris workloads. The Tokyo office must also be connected to the Paris data center. Which steps should the network engineer take to meet these requirements quickly?

The correct option establishes a new AWS presence in Tokyo, connects it to the existing Paris infrastructure, and provides connectivity for the Tokyo office quickly. Creating a transit gateway in Tokyo and peering it with the Paris transit gateway allows private, high-bandwidth communication between workloads in both regions. A Site-to-Site VPN from the Tokyo office to the Tokyo transit gateway provides immediate, secure connectivity for the office. Routing ensures all necessary communication paths are established. Option 1 is incorrect because it suggests public subnets and an internet gateway, which violates the requirement for private workloads. VPC peering is not scalable for multiple VPCs and does not provide office connectivity to AWS. Option 2 is incorrect because provisioning a new Direct Connect connection within 5 days is highly unlikely due to lead times for physical circuit installation. Option 4 is incorrect because connecting the Tokyo office directly to the Paris transit gateway via VPN would route all Tokyo office traffic through Paris, introducing high latency and potential bottlenecks. It also doesn't establish a local AWS presence for the Tokyo VPCs.