An on-premises application uses a shared SMB file share for data. The company will migrate file storage to an Amazon S3 bucket but the application must continue to access the data over SMB until the application is rewritten to use native S3 APIs. The solution must migrate the data to AWS while allowing the on-premises application to keep accessing it via SMB. Which design meets these requirements?

The correct solution uses AWS Storage Gateway's File Gateway to provide SMB access to Amazon S3. File Gateway presents an SMB interface to the on-premises application, allowing it to continue accessing data via SMB, while transparently storing that data in an S3 bucket. This meets the requirement to migrate data to S3 while maintaining SMB access for the application. Creating an FSx for Windows File Server and using DataSync would migrate the data to FSx, not S3, and the question specifically states the data must be in an S3 bucket. Directly copying data to S3 would require the application to be rewritten to use S3 APIs immediately, which is not allowed. Migrating the file server with AWS SMS would move the entire server, but the requirement is to migrate file storage to S3 and maintain SMB access, not to lift and shift the server.