Route 53 vs CloudFront
| Feature / Aspect | Amazon Route 53 | Amazon CloudFront |
|---|---|---|
| Primary Purpose | DNS service (domain resolution + routing policies) | CDN (Content Delivery Network) for caching and distribution |
| How It Works | Routes users to the right endpoint (ALB, EC2, S3, etc.) based on DNS policies | Delivers cached/static/dynamic content from AWS edge locations close to the user |
| Geographic Control | Geolocation Routing Policy = enforce strict rules (e.g., “users in Germany → only EU region”) | Caches at edge locations worldwide → can serve content from unintended regions |
| Best For | Compliance/licensing, regulatory routing, multi-region failover, routing logic | Reducing latency, improving performance, offloading traffic via caching |
| Dynamic Content | Simply forwards DNS to the right backend (EC2/ALB) | Can accelerate dynamic content with edge optimizations, but caching rules may apply |
| Elasticity | Just DNS, depends on backend scaling (e.g., EC2 Auto Scaling, ALB) | Automatically scales to handle surges in traffic at the edge |
| Performance Focus | Routing accuracy & policy enforcement | Latency reduction & bandwidth savings |
| Use Case Fit for Your Scenario | ✅ Ensures users are always routed to the correct AWS Region per distribution rights | ❌ Could serve content from unintended regions, violating content restrictions |
✅ Bottom line:
- Use Route 53 when you need strict geographic control (compliance, licensing, regulatory).
- Use CloudFront when you want fast, cached content delivery with latency-based performance, but not strict region enforcement.
Top comments (0)