From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from firstgate.proxmox.com (firstgate.proxmox.com [212.224.123.68]) by lore.proxmox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 5396C1FF145 for ; Thu, 22 Jan 2026 13:51:06 +0100 (CET) Received: from firstgate.proxmox.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by firstgate.proxmox.com (Proxmox) with ESMTP id 1B2B81678E; Thu, 22 Jan 2026 13:51:24 +0100 (CET) Message-ID: <2e59f38d-c7f4-492a-be41-3ae68b371d71@proxmox.com> Date: Thu, 22 Jan 2026 13:50:50 +0100 MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird To: Proxmox VE development discussion , Yahya Jabary References: <20260122105010.1968075-1-y.jabary@proxmox.com> Content-Language: en-US From: Fiona Ebner In-Reply-To: <20260122105010.1968075-1-y.jabary@proxmox.com> X-Bm-Milter-Handled: 55990f41-d878-4baa-be0a-ee34c49e34d2 X-Bm-Transport-Timestamp: 1769086193184 X-SPAM-LEVEL: Spam detection results: 0 AWL -0.015 Adjusted score from AWL reputation of From: address BAYES_00 -1.9 Bayes spam probability is 0 to 1% DMARC_MISSING 0.1 Missing DMARC policy KAM_DMARC_STATUS 0.01 Test Rule for DKIM or SPF Failure with Strict Alignment RCVD_IN_VALIDITY_CERTIFIED_BLOCKED 0.001 ADMINISTRATOR NOTICE: The query to Validity was blocked. See https://knowledge.validity.com/hc/en-us/articles/20961730681243 for more information. RCVD_IN_VALIDITY_RPBL_BLOCKED 0.001 ADMINISTRATOR NOTICE: The query to Validity was blocked. See https://knowledge.validity.com/hc/en-us/articles/20961730681243 for more information. RCVD_IN_VALIDITY_SAFE_BLOCKED 0.001 ADMINISTRATOR NOTICE: The query to Validity was blocked. See https://knowledge.validity.com/hc/en-us/articles/20961730681243 for more information. SPF_HELO_NONE 0.001 SPF: HELO does not publish an SPF Record SPF_PASS -0.001 SPF: sender matches SPF record Subject: Re: [pve-devel] [PATCH docs v1] warn about fail-open default in vlan X-BeenThere: pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Proxmox VE development discussion List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Reply-To: Proxmox VE development discussion Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Errors-To: pve-devel-bounces@lists.proxmox.com Sender: "pve-devel" Am 22.01.26 um 11:49 AM schrieb Yahya Jabary: > fix #4642: improve VLAN documentation We usually put a 'fix #4642:' prefix as part of the commit title. This makes it easier to search for bug fixes in the git logs and mail archives. We don't usually repeat the bug title verbatim anywhere in the commit message. It's often written by end users and not very descriptive or precise, like here. > > Signed-off-by: Yahya Jabary > --- > pve-network.adoc | 8 ++++++++ > 1 file changed, 8 insertions(+) > > diff --git a/pve-network.adoc b/pve-network.adoc > index 03524e4..23fd2a3 100644 > --- a/pve-network.adoc > +++ b/pve-network.adoc > @@ -614,6 +614,14 @@ which is transparently supported by the Linux bridge. > Trunk mode is also possible, but that makes configuration > in the guest necessary. > > +[WARNING] > +==== It seems like everywhere else in the docs we use 'WARNING: ' for this, so I'd suggest staying consistent with that. Or have a patch (series) to change it everywhere if there are good reasons for it. > +If no VLAN tag is specified in the guest configuration, the interface defaults > +to a VLAN trunk. This allows the guest to access *all* VLANs on the bridge by > +configuring VLAN tags inside the guest OS. To strictly isolate the guest to a > +specific VLAN (Access Mode), you must define a VLAN tag in the hardware settings. > +==== > + > * *"traditional" VLAN on the Linux bridge:* > In contrast to the VLAN awareness method, this method is not transparent > and creates a VLAN device with associated bridge for each VLAN. _______________________________________________ pve-devel mailing list pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com https://lists.proxmox.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pve-devel