Comment 22 for bug 1583694

So allegedly option 2 should bring the best of both worlds: for N/S (both DNAT and SNAT) a VM would go out from the Network node, for E/W, the VM would use the local compute node. Am I correct?

Now let me tell you what my fear is: I fear that this added complexity and lack of extensive testing will lead us to bug reports from folks who experience weird traffic errors and we'll keep piling up with code to handle corner cases etc. Result: DVR quality regression.

It's not like we have not seen this type of situation in the past, and I am worried we're going down the rabbit hole. As it stands, the proposed code already does not look pretty at all, so I am slightly towards a rejection, unless someone can prove me that my fears are totally unfounded.