NSX distributed routers behave, from a tenant perspective, exactly like any other router.
Beyond the service level factor, which I believe Ian is referring to as well, there is no reason for distinguishing them from standard routers through the API. I believe the same applies distributed router being implemented for Havana; therefore I would say that is more a matter pertaining service levels rather than resource attributes. I would not change the API, but rather explore whether a solution based on the service providers or the 'flavors' I was mentioning in my previous post would be feasible. I think then there will be no problem to adapt the NSX plugin to whatever is agreed. Salvatore On 12 December 2013 01:12, Ian Wells <[email protected]> wrote: > Are these NSX routers *functionally* different? > > What we're talking about here is a router which, whether it's distributed > or not, behaves *exactly the same*. So as I say, maybe it's an SLA thing, > but 'distributed' isn't really user meaningful if the user can't actually > prove he's received a distributed router by using the APIs or seeing > traffic flow differently. > > I think, by the names you're referring to, the NSX routers acutally have > different user visible behaviour, and that's a different matter entirely, > obviously you want, as a user, to choose one or the other. > -- > Ian. > > > On 10 December 2013 23:21, Vasudevan, Swaminathan (PNB Roseville) < > [email protected]> wrote: > >> Hi Nachi/Akihiro motoki, >> >> I am not clear. >> >> Today the L3 Service Plugin does not support the “service_type” attribute to >> define the provider option. >> >> >> >> Are we suggesting that we need to include the service_type for the L3 >> Service Plugin and then we can make use of the “service_type” attribute to >> distinguish between the “edge” and “distributed”. >> >> >> >> >> >> So if I understand correctly, a “provider” router will be an Edge router and >> a non-provider router will be a “distributed router”. >> >> >> >> Thanks >> >> Swami >> >> >> >> >I'm +1 for 'provider'. >> >> >> >> 2013/12/9 Akihiro Motoki <[email protected]>: >> >> > Neutron defines "provider" attribute and it is/will be used in advanced >> >> > services (LB, FW, VPN). >> >> > Doesn't it fit for a distributed router case? If we can cover all services >> >> > with one concept, it would be nice. >> >> > >> >> > According to this thread, we assumes at least two types "edge" and >> >> > "distributed". >> >> > Though "edge" and "distributed" is a type of implementations, I think they >> >> > are some kind of "provider". >> >> > >> >> > I just would like to add an option. I am open to "provider" vs "distirbute" >> >> > attributes. >> >> > >> >> > Thanks, >> >> > Akihiro >> >> > >> >> > (2013/12/10 7:01), Vasudevan, Swaminathan (PNB Roseville) wrote: >> >> >> Hi Folks, >> >> >> >> >> >> We are in the process of defining the API for the Neutron Distributed >> >> >> Virtual Router, and we have a question. >> >> >> >> >> >> Just wanted to get the feedback from the community before we implement and >> >> >> post for review. >> >> >> >> >> >> We are planning to use the “distributed” flag for the routers that are >> >> >> supposed to be routing traffic locally (both East West and North South). >> >> >> This “distributed” flag is already there in the “neutronclient” API, but >> >> >> currently only utilized by the “Nicira Plugin”. >> >> >> We would like to go ahead and use the same “distributed” flag and add an >> >> >> extension to the router table to accommodate the “distributed flag”. >> >> >> >> >> >> Please let us know your feedback. >> >> >> >> >> >> Thanks. >> >> >> >> >> >> Swaminathan Vasudevan >> >> >> Systems Software Engineer (TC) >> >> >> HP Networking >> >> >> Hewlett-Packard >> >> >> 8000 Foothills Blvd >> >> >> M/S 5541 >> >> >> Roseville, CA - 95747 >> >> >> tel: 916.785.0937 >> >> >> fax: 916.785.1815 >> >> >> email: [email protected] <mailto:[email protected] >> >> <[email protected]>> >> >> >> >> >> >> Swaminathan Vasudevan >> >> Systems Software Engineer (TC) >> >> >> >> >> >> HP Networking >> >> Hewlett-Packard >> >> 8000 Foothills Blvd >> >> M/S 5541 >> >> Roseville, CA - 95747 >> >> tel: 916.785.0937 >> >> fax: 916.785.1815 >> >> email: [email protected] >> >> >> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> OpenStack-dev mailing list >> [email protected] >> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev >> >> > > _______________________________________________ > OpenStack-dev mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev > >
_______________________________________________ OpenStack-dev mailing list [email protected] http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
