[MidoNet] [MidoNet-dev] Admin Router vs. Provider Router

Samir Ibradžić samir at midokura.com
Mon Nov 10 10:56:09 UTC 2014


+1 for Service Router, or "Network Service(s) Router" ;)

On 2014年11月10日 18:57, Giuseppe (Pino) de Candia wrote:
> -1 for "Service Router" I just don't like the sound of it :-)
> 
> But thanks for raising this point. Ryu, Jaume, and other Neutron
> integration folks, can you elaborate on what tenant the Provider Router
> will belong to? How certain are these plans?
> 
> thanks,
> Pino
> 
> 
> On Mon, Nov 10, 2014 at 10:45 AM, Abel Navarro <abel at midokura.com
> <mailto:abel at midokura.com>> wrote:
> 
>     I think it was proposed the router formerly known as Provider Router
>     to be in the service tenant, not in the admin tenant. Having an
>     Admin Router in the service tenant can be confusing. What about
>     Service Router?
> 
>     On Mon, Nov 10, 2014 at 10:38 AM, Jaume Devesa <devvesa at gmail.com
>     <mailto:devvesa at gmail.com>> wrote:
> 
>         +1 to use 'Admin Router'. As Pino said, a Provider Router
>         feature already exists on Neutron and it means 'map the hardware
>         router into neutron model'
>         It's going to be difficult to us, because we have get used to
>         this term, but let's do the effort! :)
> 
>         On 10 November 2014 09:58, Giuseppe (Pino) de Candia
>         <gdecandia at midokura.com <mailto:gdecandia at midokura.com>> wrote:
> 
>             In Paris we were trying to evangelize our Provider Router
>             Proposal for Kilo. Some core contributors found the term
>             "Provider Router" mis-leading because they relate it to
>             Provider Network and view the term "Provider" as a hint that
>             the device is managed outside OpenStack. Instead, our
>             Provider Router is an OpenStack/MidoNet virtual device that
>             provides L3 networking between Tenant Routers and between
>             Tenant Routers and the Internet.
> 
>             I'm not asking for an immediate change in terminology, but
>             I'd like us to move towards the term "Admin Router". Does
>             that make sense?
> 
>             --Pino
> 
>             _______________________________________________
>             MidoNet mailing list
>             MidoNet at lists.midonet.org <mailto:MidoNet at lists.midonet.org>
>             http://lists.midonet.org/listinfo/midonet
> 
> 
> 
> 
>         -- 
>         Jaume Devesa
>         Software Engineer at Midokura
> 
>         _______________________________________________
>         MidoNet-dev mailing list
>         MidoNet-dev at lists.midonet.org <mailto:MidoNet-dev at lists.midonet.org>
>         http://lists.midonet.org/listinfo/midonet-dev
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> MidoNet mailing list
> MidoNet at lists.midonet.org
> http://lists.midonet.org/listinfo/midonet
> 


More information about the MidoNet mailing list