From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from gate001.proxmox.com (gate001.proxmox.com [IPv6:2a0f:8001:1:32::40]) by lore.proxmox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id E7BD11FF09C for ; Mon, 19 Oct 2026 20:23:55 +0200 (CEST) Received: from gate001.proxmox.com (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by gate001.proxmox.com (Proxmox) with ESMTP id A7E0A215F8; Mon, 19 Oct 2026 20:23:54 +0200 (CEST) From: Thomas Lamprecht To: pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com, Kefu Chai Subject: applied: [PATCH manager v2 0/4] cephx: migrate keys with a monitor this cluster does not manage Date: Mon, 19 Oct 2026 20:23:39 +0200 Message-ID: <179243421710.2171626.5140844699955015642.b4-ty@b4> X-Mailer: git-send-email 2.47.3 In-Reply-To: <20261019082346.1781960-1-k.chai@proxmox.com> References: <20261019082346.1781960-1-k.chai@proxmox.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Bm-Milter-Handled: 55990f41-d878-4baa-be0a-ee34c49e34d2 X-Bm-Transport-Timestamp: 1792434225801 X-SPAM-LEVEL: Spam detection results: 0 AWL 0.482 Adjusted score from AWL reputation of From: address DMARC_MISSING 0.1 Missing DMARC policy KAM_DMARC_STATUS 0.01 Test Rule for DKIM or SPF Failure with Strict Alignment (newer systems) RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED -2.3 Sender listed at https://www.dnswl.org/, medium trust SPF_HELO_NONE 0.001 SPF: HELO does not publish an SPF Record SPF_PASS -0.001 SPF: sender matches SPF record Message-ID-Hash: 3NBP7DRIAWMSVY4K4DTHK657DYK5NZ5V X-Message-ID-Hash: 3NBP7DRIAWMSVY4K4DTHK657DYK5NZ5V X-MailFrom: t.lamprecht@proxmox.com X-Mailman-Rule-Misses: dmarc-mitigation; no-senders; approved; loop; banned-address; emergency; member-moderation; nonmember-moderation; administrivia; implicit-dest; max-recipients; max-size; news-moderation; no-subject; digests; suspicious-header CC: Jonas Theisen X-Mailman-Version: 3.3.10 Precedence: list List-Id: Proxmox VE development discussion List-Help: List-Owner: List-Post: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: On Mon, 19 Oct 2026 16:23:42 +0800, Kefu Chai wrote: > A user reported an interesting stretch-cluster setup that > pve-cephx-rotate-service-keys wasn't ready for: a tiebreaker monitor > running on a standalone Proxmox VE host that isn't a node of the > cluster itself, joined to the corosync quorum only through a QDevice > and never listed under /etc/pve/nodes. All five monitors were in > quorum and on the same, capable Ceph version, but the dry run still > failed twice over: > > [...] Applied, thanks! [1/4] migrations: cephx: ask a monitor about itself through one route https://git.proxmox.com/?p=pve-manager.git;a=commitdiff;h=9b21b8d0e94cf4faa56ee3849180290e8999b00d [2/4] migrations: cephx: judge cipher support by the version a daemon runs https://git.proxmox.com/?p=pve-manager.git;a=commitdiff;h=05d23944d932c5736a8a80e855ccda56f5f4d100 [3/4] migrations: cephx: rotate the monitor key with monitors we do not manage https://git.proxmox.com/?p=pve-manager.git;a=commitdiff;h=17b16f4f7a73636e03849d4005601be6f93b7bc5 [4/4] migrations: cephx: name the hosts keeping key copies we cannot write https://git.proxmox.com/?p=pve-manager.git;a=commitdiff;h=ef9dcc649cc86c14dd502bcd8c0313ba6333dc48