A company in early AWS adoption runs an application on-premises in Asia and needs new applications in us-east-1 to connect to that datacenter. The channel must reduce latency, avoid transcontinental public internet routing performance issues, and encrypt data in transit. Which solution can be deployed in the LEAST amount of time?

The correct solution leverages AWS Site-to-Site VPN with acceleration and Transit Gateway. Site-to-Site VPN is quick to deploy as it uses existing internet connections, and acceleration significantly reduces latency and improves performance over long distances by routing traffic through the AWS global network. Transit Gateway centralizes connectivity, allowing the VPN to connect to multiple VPCs efficiently. Incorrect options: Using a Virtual Private Gateway (VPG) directly with a VPN limits connectivity to a single VPC, which is less scalable than Transit Gateway for future expansion. AWS Direct Connect offers dedicated bandwidth and lower latency but requires physical provisioning, making it the slowest to deploy. Creating a VPN over a public VIF with Direct Connect adds unnecessary complexity and latency compared to a direct VPN with acceleration. Disabling acceleration on the Site-to-Site VPN would negate the benefit of reduced latency and improved performance over the public internet, which is a key requirement.