[MidoNet] [MidoNet-dev] Admin Router vs. Provider Router
ryu at midokura.com
Tue Nov 11 07:31:54 UTC 2014
I like one of edge, admin or gateway router.
The router would belong to the user/tenant who has 'admin' privilege.
It's the same user that has the privilege to create external networks.
On Tue, Nov 11, 2014 at 3:34 AM, Alexander Gabert <alexander at midokura.com>
> 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> 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?
>> MidoNet mailing list
>> MidoNet at lists.midonet.org
> 235 Montgomery Street
> San Francisco
> CA 94104
> MidoNet-dev mailing list
> MidoNet-dev at lists.midonet.org
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the MidoNet