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 9C8681FF0B3 for ; Wed, 11 Nov 2026 14:20:55 +0100 (CET) Received: from gate001.proxmox.com (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by gate001.proxmox.com (Proxmox) with ESMTP id 7588E217F7; Wed, 11 Nov 2026 14:19:44 +0100 (CET) From: Arthur Bied-Charreton To: pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com Subject: [PATCH pve-container v6 18/28] api: destroy_vm: add option to handle dangling IPSet references Date: Wed, 11 Nov 2026 14:18:51 +0100 Message-ID: <20261111131901.1791124-19-a.bied-charreton@proxmox.com> X-Mailer: git-send-email 2.47.3 In-Reply-To: <20261111131901.1791124-1-a.bied-charreton@proxmox.com> References: <20261111131901.1791124-1-a.bied-charreton@proxmox.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Bm-Milter-Handled: 55990f41-d878-4baa-be0a-ee34c49e34d2 X-Bm-Transport-Timestamp: 1794403148801 X-SPAM-LEVEL: Spam detection results: 0 AWL 0.576 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) POISEN_SPAM_PILL_3 0.1 random spam to be learned in bayes 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: TDAJLNUB5S77NZIPIK6PDAWHKRBO722D X-Message-ID-Hash: TDAJLNUB5S77NZIPIK6PDAWHKRBO722D X-MailFrom: a.bied-charreton@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: For each guest with IPAM entries, a 'guest-ipam-' IPSet is auto-generated [0]. Therefore, deleting a guest can lead to firewall rules referencing non-existing IPSets, which the firewall fails to parse and ignores. Add a 'dangling-ipset-references' option for DELETE /nodes/{node}/lxc/{vmid} allowing to 'drop' rules referencing now-deleted IPSets, to 'disable' them, or to 'keep' them as they are. [0] https://pve.proxmox.com/wiki/Software-Defined_Network#pvesdn_firewall_integration Signed-off-by: Arthur Bied-Charreton --- src/PVE/API2/LXC.pm | 18 ++++++++++++++++++ 1 file changed, 18 insertions(+) diff --git a/src/PVE/API2/LXC.pm b/src/PVE/API2/LXC.pm index d736dac..6d5d49e 100644 --- a/src/PVE/API2/LXC.pm +++ b/src/PVE/API2/LXC.pm @@ -13,6 +13,7 @@ use PVE::Cluster qw(cfs_read_file); use PVE::DataCenterConfig; use PVE::Exception qw(raise raise_param_exc raise_perm_exc); use PVE::Firewall; +use PVE::Firewall::References; use PVE::GuestHelpers; use PVE::INotify; use PVE::JSONSchema qw(get_standard_option); @@ -849,6 +850,15 @@ __PACKAGE__->register_method({ . " enabled storages which are not referenced in the config.", optional => 1, }, + 'dangling-ipset-references' => get_standard_option( + 'pve-dangling-references-delete', + { + description => + 'Handle firewall rules referencing the IPSet auto-generated for ' + . 'this guest (\'guest-ipam-\'). Use \'disable\' to disable them, or ' + . '\'drop\' to remove them entirely.', + }, + ), }, }, returns => { @@ -926,6 +936,14 @@ __PACKAGE__->register_method({ } } + my $action = $param->{'dangling-ipset-references'} // 'keep'; + if ($action ne 'keep') { + eval { + PVE::Firewall::References::update_guest_ipam_ipset_refs($vmid, $action); + }; + warn "could not $action dangling IPSet references: $@" if $@; + } + # only now remove the zombie config, else we can have reuse race PVE::LXC::Config->destroy_config($vmid); }; -- 2.47.3