Re: TCP Router VS NoRouter


Mike Youngstrom
 

Hi Owais,

What are you referring to when you say you're concerned about the LTM
becoming a Monolith? Too much functionality in one component? Too much of
the system depending on one component?

Chip,

Hopefully it's ok to discuss NoRouter here even though it isn't an official
CF project. Let us know if it is not.

Mike

On Fri, May 15, 2015 at 10:55 AM, Chip Childers <cchilders(a)cloudfoundry.org>
wrote:

The "norouter", while interesting, isn't the official CF project approach
to HTTP traffic routing. The TCP router is being built to support TCP
routing as a general solution, with the goal of it becoming an official
part of the CF release when ready.

-chip

Chip Childers | Technology Chief of Staff | Cloud Foundry Foundation

On Fri, May 15, 2015 at 8:58 AM, Mohamed, Owais <
Owais.Mohamed(a)covisint.com> wrote:

Hi,

I attended sessions on both TCP Router (Cloud Foundry and IOT protocol
support by Atul Kshirsagar) and NoRouter (Norouter: Running Cloud
Foundry without the Gorouter by Mike Heath).

I just wanted to start a discussion on the pros and cons of each
approach.

As personal opinion I think NoRouter is a simpler approach and can
definitely be made to support IOT protocols. The main drawback I see with
the NoRouter is the danger of the LTM becoming a Monolith.

Any suggestions\ideas?

Regards,
Owais


_______________________________________________
cf-dev mailing list
cf-dev(a)lists.cloudfoundry.org
https://lists.cloudfoundry.org/mailman/listinfo/cf-dev

_______________________________________________
cf-dev mailing list
cf-dev(a)lists.cloudfoundry.org
https://lists.cloudfoundry.org/mailman/listinfo/cf-dev

Join cf-dev@lists.cloudfoundry.org to automatically receive all group messages.