An on-premises VPN provides employees remote access to their Windows home directories. Remote workforce growth has saturated the data center VPN bandwidth during business hours. The company needs an AWS solution that supports more remote users, reduces on-premises VPN bandwidth usage, and minimizes operational overhead. Which combination of steps achieves this with the least operational overhead? (Choose two.)

Migrating home directories to Amazon FSx for Windows File Server directly addresses the need for scalable storage that integrates seamlessly with Windows environments, reducing the load on on-premises resources. FSx for Windows File Server provides fully managed, highly available, and scalable file storage accessible via the Server Message Block (SMB) protocol, which is native for Windows home directories. Migrating remote users to AWS Client VPN offloads the VPN bandwidth from the on-premises data center to AWS, allowing for increased concurrent users and reducing the strain on existing infrastructure. This combination provides a fully managed, scalable solution with minimal operational overhead. Deploying an AWS Storage Gateway Volume Gateway would still require managing an on-premises file server and wouldn't fully offload the storage or VPN burden. Amazon FSx for Lustre is optimized for high-performance computing workloads, not general-purpose Windows home directories. Provisioning an AWS Direct Connect connection would improve connectivity but wouldn't directly solve the VPN bandwidth saturation or provide a scalable home directory solution on its own.