AZ-700 Question 147
Single answerA global manufacturing company operates branch offices in Europe and Asia with both ExpressRoute and site-to-site VPN connections. They want to design an Azure Virtual WAN so that offices in Europe and Asia can securely exchange data with each other and connect to Azure VNets in both regions. They also need the flexibility to route traffic between on-premises locations through Azure if needed. Which design approach should you implement to meet these requirements with minimal complexity?
- A
Deploy a single Virtual WAN hub in Europe and connect all branch offices there, relying on the default routing for cross-region traffic.
- B
Deploy one Virtual WAN hub in each region (Europe and Asia) and enable inter-hub transit to allow traffic flow between hubs and VNets.
- C
Create separate Virtual WAN resources for each branch office location, isolating connectivity to smaller, regional hubs without inter-hub communication.
- D
Use Azure VPN Gateway in each region without deploying any Virtual WAN solution, relying on custom routes to handle cross-region traffic.
Show answer and explanation
Correct answer: B
Explanation
Azure Virtual WAN supports multi-region designs through multiple hubs and inter-hub transit, enabling efficient connectivity across on-premises sites and Azure VNets in different regions. According to Microsoft documentation (https://docs.microsoft.com/azure/virtual-wan/virtual-wan-about), deploying hubs in the regions closest to the branch offices and using inter-hub transit provides an optimal, scalable solution for global enterprises needing simple, secure, and low-latency routing.
- A. Incorrect.
Incorrect: A single hub in Europe may simplify deployment, but it can lead to suboptimal routing and latency for branches in Asia. It also complicates inter-regional traffic flow because traffic from Asia would have to transit back to Europe for local resources, which fails the 'minimal complexity' and efficient routing requirement.
- B. Correct.
Correct: Deploying a Virtual WAN hub in both Europe and Asia, then configuring inter-hub transit, enables direct and efficient communication across regions and on-premises sites. It simplifies routing by allowing branch-to-branch and branch-to-VNet traffic without forcing everything through a single region.
- C. Incorrect.
Incorrect: While separating Virtual WAN resources might provide more granular control, it dramatically increases management overhead and does not simplify cross-region traffic patterns. Each isolated Virtual WAN would require additional configuration for global connectivity.
- D. Incorrect.
Incorrect: Using individual VPN Gateways without an Azure Virtual WAN does not leverage the built-in global transit capabilities of a Virtual WAN. This approach requires extensive custom routing and can become complex to manage at scale.