Which solution meets these requirements MOST cost-effectively?
Use Amazon S3 multi-part upload functionality to transfer the files over HTTPS.
Create a VPN connection between the on-premises NAS system and the nearest AWS Region. Transfer the data over the VPN connection.
Use the AWS Snow Family console to order several AWS Snowball Edge Storage Optimized devices. Use the devices to transfer the data to Amazon S3.
Set up a 10 Gbps AWS Direct Connect connection between the company location and the nearest AWS Region. Transfer the data over a VPN connection into the Region to store the data in Amazon S3.
Explanations:
Using Amazon S3 multi-part upload functionality over HTTPS would be too slow to meet the 2-week deadline. At 100 Mbps, transferring 600 TB would take approximately 5.54 weeks (around 38.5 days).
Creating a VPN connection would also be slow due to the 100 Mbps limit. Similar to option A, it would take over 5 weeks to transfer the data, failing to meet the 2-week requirement.
Using AWS Snowball Edge Storage Optimized devices is the most cost-effective solution. Snowball devices can handle large data transfers securely and quickly, allowing for physical transfer to AWS. This method can meet the 2-week deadline effectively.
Setting up a 10 Gbps AWS Direct Connect is expensive and time-consuming, and although it could theoretically meet the deadline, it is not necessary for the data size and requirements given the option of Snowball. This makes it less cost-effective compared to using Snowball.
I believe the answer is:
Use the AWS Snow Family console to order several AWS Snowball Edge Storage Optimized devices. Use the devices to transfer the data to Amazon S3.
If memory serves me right, the answer is:
Use the AWS Snow Family console to order several AWS Snowball Edge Storage Optimized devices. Use the devices to transfer the data to Amazon S3.