From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from gate001.proxmox.com (gate001.proxmox.com [45.144.208.40]) by lore.proxmox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 3CCDE1FF0F5 for ; Tue, 03 Nov 2026 00:23:10 +0100 (CET) Received: from gate001.proxmox.com (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by gate001.proxmox.com (Proxmox) with ESMTP id 7AF332175E; Tue, 03 Nov 2026 00:23:07 +0100 (CET) From: Thomas Lamprecht To: pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com, Arthur Bied-Charreton Subject: applied: [PATCH pve-firewall v3] api: aliases: make cidr optional on update and preserve comment Date: Tue, 3 Nov 2026 00:22:47 +0100 Message-ID: <179366176537.2144882.9208850266644918848.b4-ty@b4> X-Mailer: git-send-email 2.47.3 In-Reply-To: <20261015054534.25978-1-a.bied-charreton@proxmox.com> References: <20261015054534.25978-1-a.bied-charreton@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: 1793661783157 X-SPAM-LEVEL: Spam detection results: 0 AWL 0.348 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: P7A4YJHNULRLGFHM2OGH6GN64NW3LAYG X-Message-ID-Hash: P7A4YJHNULRLGFHM2OGH6GN64NW3LAYG 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 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 Thu, 15 Oct 2026 07:45:34 +0200, Arthur Bied-Charreton wrote: > Updating an alias required passing its CIDR, and dropped the existing > comment unless it was passed again. Clients therefore had to fetch the > alias first just to send back the currently configured CIDR and comment. > > Make 'cidr' optional in PUT .../firewall/aliases/{name} and keep the > existing CIDR and comment if none is passed. Passing an empty comment > still clears it. > > [...] Applied, thanks! [1/1] api: aliases: make cidr optional on update and preserve comment commit: 1bba92a1505a3ca9c69b853998e1f020cff1c8da