A company uses an AWS Site-to-Site VPN from its on-premises data center to a virtual private gateway. Due to internet congestion, availability and performance across the internet are poor. The network engineer must reduce these issues as quickly as possible with minimal administrative effort. Which solution meets these constraints?

The correct solution involves deploying a Transit Gateway and creating a new accelerated Site-to-Site VPN. AWS Site-to-Site VPN acceleration uses AWS Global Accelerator to route traffic over the AWS global network, bypassing internet congestion and improving performance. This requires a Transit Gateway to attach the accelerated VPN connection. The existing Virtual Private Gateway does not support accelerated VPN connections directly. Updating the customer gateway to use the new connection and deleting the old one ensures a smooth transition with minimal downtime. Editing the existing Site-to-Site VPN connection to enable acceleration is incorrect because acceleration is not a setting that can be simply toggled on an existing VPN connection attached to a Virtual Private Gateway. A new accelerated connection must be created. Creating a new accelerated Site-to-Site VPN connection and attaching it to the existing Virtual Private Gateway is incorrect because Virtual Private Gateways do not support accelerated VPN connections; only Transit Gateways do. Ordering an AWS Direct Connect connection is incorrect because while it would solve the performance issue, it involves significant lead time for procurement and installation, which does not meet the "as quickly as possible" constraint.