Account 1 has a production VPC (VPC-A) in eu-west-1 attached to TGW-A, which is connected to an on-premises data center in Dublin via a Direct Connect transit VIF and Direct Connect gateway. Account 2 has a staging VPC (VPC-B) attached to TGW-B in eu-west-2. A network engineer must provide connectivity from VPC-B to the on-premises data center in Dublin. Which solutions will achieve this? (Choose two.)

Associating TGW-B directly with the Direct Connect gateway (DXGW) is a valid solution. A DXGW can be associated with multiple Transit Gateways, even across different AWS Regions, provided the TGWs are in the same account or shared via AWS Resource Access Manager (RAM). This allows VPC-B to directly use the existing Direct Connect connection to the on-premises data center. The VPC-B CIDR must be explicitly added to the allowed prefixes on the DXGW association to permit traffic. Establishing inter-Region transit gateway peering between TGW-A and TGW-B is also a valid solution. This connects VPC-B to TGW-A, which is already connected to the DXGW. Routes must be configured in both TGW route tables to direct traffic between VPC-B and the DXGW. Both VPC-A and VPC-B CIDRs must be included in the allowed prefixes on the DXGW association to ensure reachability to on-premises. Incorrect options: Inter-Region VPC peering between VPC-A and VPC-B would not work because VPC peering does not support transitive routing through a TGW to a DXGW. Creating another transit VIF is unnecessary and complex; a single DXGW can support multiple TGW associations. An AWS Site-to-Site VPN over the transit VIF is redundant and adds complexity; the DXGW provides direct connectivity.