What action will you recommend to the organization?
Only Elastic IP can be used by requesting limit increase, since AWS does not assign a public IP to an instance with multiple ENIs.
AWS VPC does not attach a public IP to an ENI; so the only way is to use an Elastic IP.
I agree with the suggestion but will prefer that the organization should use separate subnets with each ENI for different public IPs.
I agree with the suggestion and it is recommended to use a public IP from AWS since the organization is going to use DNS with Route 53.
Explanations:
While requesting a limit increase for Elastic IPs is a potential solution, AWS can assign public IPs to instances launched in a VPC if configured correctly. However, when using multiple ENIs, an instance can only have one public IP assigned directly to its primary ENI. Thus, relying solely on Elastic IPs is not necessary.
This option incorrectly states that AWS VPC does not attach a public IP to an ENI. While it’s true that only the primary ENI can have a public IP automatically assigned, public IPs can still be associated with the instance via the primary ENI without requiring an Elastic IP.
Using separate subnets with each ENI for different public IPs is not necessary as AWS allows the assignment of public IPs directly to the primary ENI. The complexity of managing multiple subnets for separate public IPs can be avoided by leveraging public IPs on the primary ENI.
This option correctly suggests using public IPs assigned by AWS, which are automatically assigned to the primary ENI during instance launch. Since the organization is using Route 53 for DNS, public IPs simplify domain management without the limitations of Elastic IP allocations.
Based on what I know, the answer is:
I agree with the suggestion and it is recommended to use a public IP from AWS since the organization is going to use DNS with Route 53.