[MidoNet] Admin Router vs. Provider Router

Samir Ibradžić samir at midokura.com
Tue Nov 11 02:47:05 UTC 2014


To stir up the router linguistics discussion...

IMHO, all names contains 'Edge' are ambiguous, we can have multiple edge
routers, which we need to distinguish from 'main' or 'service-providing
router'.

Also, whatever the name, it SHOULD live in services tenant, not admin
tenant. That is where services that do not belong to user tenants live
in OpenStack, admin tenant does not own anything at all. Having our
'Master-router' in admin tenant complicates privilege management by
requiring admin right in admin tenant (highest OpenStack privilege
possible) just to able to manage it, which can be dangerous (we had
several incidents related to this in the old MidoCloud).

R,
S

On 2014年11月11日 03:34, Alexander Gabert wrote:
> Hello, the following names work for me:
> 
> distributed virtual edge router (because that is what it is, yet could
> be confused with DVR name)
> edge router (less cool but still works)
> virtual edge router (has a cool name also, and less likely to be
> confused with DVR)
> uplink/upstream/WAN router (may be confusing)
> virtual edge gateway (minimalistic approach, resembles the fact that we
> actually do L2 and L3)
> distributed virtual edge gateway (may be too much as a four-letter
> acronym but at least it shows what we do)
> 
> please do not use words like 'admin' or 'service' because that implies a
> (not user visible) back-office job description for the component.
> 
> thx alex
> 
> 
> On Mon, Nov 10, 2014 at 9:58 AM, 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
> 
> 
> 
> 
> -- 
> Midokura
> 
> 235 Montgomery Street
> San Francisco
> CA 94104
> 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> MidoNet mailing list
> MidoNet at lists.midonet.org
> http://lists.midonet.org/listinfo/midonet
> 


More information about the MidoNet mailing list