[openstack-dev] [Neutron][IPAM] Uniqueness of subnets within a tenant

Jay Pipes jaypipes at gmail.com
Fri Mar 20 18:31:59 UTC 2015

On 03/11/2015 06:48 PM, John Belamaric wrote:
> This has been settled and we're not moving forward with it for Kilo. I
> agree tenants are an administrative concept, not a networking one so
> using them for uniqueness doesn't really make sense.
> In Liberty we are proposing a new grouping mechanism, as you call it,
> specifically for the purpose of defining uniqueness - address scopes.
> This would be owned by a tenant but could be shared across tenants. It's
> still in the early stages of definition though, and more discussion is
> needed but should probably wait until after Kilo is out!

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?

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?

Genuinely curious.


More information about the OpenStack-dev mailing list