Skip to main content

6 posts tagged with "architecture"

View All Tags
How to Compare LLM Gateways

How to Compare LLM Gateways

· 6 min read

"Which LLM gateway should we use?" doesn't have a universal answer, because teams optimize for different things — fastest to adopt, cheapest to run, most observable, or most governable. What is universal is the set of questions worth asking, and the order to ask them in.

This is a framework, not a leaderboard. And it's deliberately governance-first, because that's the axis where products differ most and demo videos reveal least. Routing and provider coverage are easy to compare and roughly commoditized; whether a platform can enforce a policy, prove what it did, and keep sensitive data in your perimeter is where the real divergence — and the real buying decision — lives. DVARA is one option in the field; the point of this post is to help you score the field, including us, on criteria that matter.

How LLM Fallback and Failover Work

How LLM Fallback and Failover Work

· 4 min read

Model providers are remarkably good and occasionally unavailable. They rate-limit you at the worst moment, degrade under load, and have real outages. If your application talks to a provider directly, every one of those events is a user-facing failure — and every team ends up writing its own retry loop, usually badly.

Resilience belongs in the same layer as governance, and for the same reason: it can't be trusted if it's scattered and invisible. When failover runs at a single governed control point — the DVARA LLM Gateway, the data plane of the AI governance platform — every retry and provider switch is policy-checked and written to the audit trail, so "we failed over to a different provider" is a recorded, reviewable event, not a silent mystery. LLM fallback and failover move resilience out of application code and onto the governed path.

Multi-Provider LLM Routing in an LLM Gateway

Multi-Provider LLM Routing in an LLM Gateway

· 7 min read

Multi-provider LLM routing sends each model request to an eligible provider according to a declared strategy while keeping policy, PII controls, rate limits, audit, and cost attribution on the same request path. It solves a platform problem: applications should not each implement their own provider selection and silently drift into different governance behavior.

DVARA is an AI governance platform; the DVARA LLM Gateway is the component that routes model traffic. The application keeps one OpenAI-compatible endpoint, while the Gateway chooses a provider only after governance checks and capability filtering.

Why AI Traffic Needs More Than an API Gateway

Why AI Traffic Needs More Than an API Gateway

· 10 min read
Correction, 2026-08-28

This post was published against 1.0.0 and referred to the gateway image as ghcr.io/dvarahq/dvara/dvara-llm-gateway. The package was renamed to ghcr.io/dvarahq/dvara-gateway in 1.7.0, so the original command no longer pulls anything. The commands below have been updated to the current image and tag. The post also described the MCP Proxy as a dedicated process on port 8070; in 1.7.0 the MCP and A2A planes moved into the gateway process, so that port no longer exists and the sentence has been corrected. Current documentation calls this component the DVARA MCP Gateway. The rest of the post is unchanged.

Your API gateway handles TLS termination, rate limiting, and request routing. It does these things well. But when your traffic carries prompts, tokens, tool calls, and model-specific payloads, an API gateway becomes a passthrough — it can see the HTTP envelope but not the AI semantics inside it.