On Fri, Mar 20, 2015 at 12:31 PM, Jay Pipes <jaypi...@gmail.com> wrote: > This is a question purely out of curiousity. Why is Neutron averse to the > concept of using tenants as natural ways of dividing up the cloud -- which > at its core means "multi-tenant", on-demand computing and networking?
>From what I've heard others say both in this thread and privately to me, there are already a lot of cases where a tenant will use the same address range to stamp out identical topologies. It occurred to me that we might even being doing this with our own gate infrastructure but I don't know for sure. > Is this just due to a lack of traditional use of the term in networking > literature? Or is this something more deep-grained (architecturally) than > that? We already have NAT serving as the natural divider between them and so there is no reason to create another artificial way of dividing them up which will force them to change their practices. I've come to terms with this since my earlier replies to this thread. Carl __________________________________________________________________________ OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
