On 03/20/2015 03:37 PM, Carl Baldwin wrote:
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.
OK, thanks for the info, Carl, appreciated.
Best,
-jay
__________________________________________________________________________
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
