An environmental company deploys air-quality sensors across major cities. Sensors use AWS IoT Core to ingest time-series readings and the company stores the data in Amazon DynamoDB. For business continuity, they must be able to ingest and store data in two AWS Regions. Which solution satisfies this requirement?

The correct solution ensures high availability and disaster recovery for both IoT ingestion and data storage. Creating an AWS IoT Core domain configuration in each Region allows independent endpoints for device communication. Route 53 health checks and a failover routing policy automatically direct traffic to the healthy Region's IoT Core endpoint, ensuring continuous ingestion even if one Region experiences an outage. Converting the DynamoDB table to a global table provides automatic, active-active replication across Regions, satisfying the requirement for data storage in two Regions with built-in conflict resolution. Incorrect options: Migrating to Aurora global tables is unnecessary as DynamoDB global tables directly support the requirement and are more suitable for time-series data from IoT. Using MemoryDB for Redis with cross-Region replication is not a direct replacement for DynamoDB for this use case and introduces additional complexity. Configuring DynamoDB Streams and cross-Region data replication manually is less efficient and robust than using DynamoDB global tables, which handle replication automatically.