From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <dietmar@proxmox.com>
Received: from firstgate.proxmox.com (firstgate.proxmox.com [212.224.123.68])
 (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits)
 key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits))
 (No client certificate requested)
 by lists.proxmox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 73FF163A7B
 for <pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com>; Wed, 25 Nov 2020 12:40:03 +0100 (CET)
Received: from firstgate.proxmox.com (localhost [127.0.0.1])
 by firstgate.proxmox.com (Proxmox) with ESMTP id 6450B190D6
 for <pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com>; Wed, 25 Nov 2020 12:39:33 +0100 (CET)
Received: from proxmox-new.maurer-it.com (proxmox-new.maurer-it.com
 [212.186.127.180])
 (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits)
 key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits))
 (No client certificate requested)
 by firstgate.proxmox.com (Proxmox) with ESMTPS id F0E56190C8
 for <pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com>; Wed, 25 Nov 2020 12:39:32 +0100 (CET)
Received: from proxmox-new.maurer-it.com (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1])
 by proxmox-new.maurer-it.com (Proxmox) with ESMTP id AFB9443B7C
 for <pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com>; Wed, 25 Nov 2020 12:39:32 +0100 (CET)
Date: Wed, 25 Nov 2020 12:39:20 +0100 (CET)
From: Dietmar Maurer <dietmar@proxmox.com>
To: Wolfgang Bumiller <w.bumiller@proxmox.com>,
 Proxmox VE development discussion <pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com>
Message-ID: <307314515.437.1606304361026@webmail.proxmox.com>
In-Reply-To: <2084384783.436.1606304071084@webmail.proxmox.com>
References: <20201125103643.26978-1-w.bumiller@proxmox.com>
 <261268061.433.1606302520485@webmail.proxmox.com>
 <1883887326.435.1606303343832@webmail.proxmox.com>
 <2084384783.436.1606304071084@webmail.proxmox.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
Importance: Normal
X-Mailer: Open-Xchange Mailer v7.10.4-Rev13
X-Originating-Client: open-xchange-appsuite
X-SPAM-LEVEL: Spam detection results:  0
 AWL 0.114 Adjusted score from AWL reputation of From: address
 KAM_DMARC_STATUS 0.01 Test Rule for DKIM or SPF Failure with Strict Alignment
 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
Subject: Re: [pve-devel] [PATCH v3 manager] ad #3140: allow interface suffix
 in dns entries
X-BeenThere: pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: Proxmox VE development discussion <pve-devel.lists.proxmox.com>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.proxmox.com/cgi-bin/mailman/options/pve-devel>, 
 <mailto:pve-devel-request@lists.proxmox.com?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.proxmox.com/pipermail/pve-devel/>
List-Post: <mailto:pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com>
List-Help: <mailto:pve-devel-request@lists.proxmox.com?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.proxmox.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pve-devel>, 
 <mailto:pve-devel-request@lists.proxmox.com?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 25 Nov 2020 11:40:03 -0000

Thanks for the info. But what encoding does that text use? I cannot find that in RFC4007 (they only
talk about strings and text).

> > Answering myself, it is defined in RFC4007.
> > 
> > But "man resolv.conf" say address must be RFC2373 ?
> 
> It'll still work. It's a very common notation for link local addresses,
> since with multiple interfaces you have multiple routes with the exact
> same prefix (including length). One `fe80::/64 dev <iface>` entry for
> every ipv6 enabled interface, so things such as `ping fe80::1` don't
> know what to do, so you need to either add `-I IFACE` or use
> `fe80::1%IFACE`.
> 
> `getaddrinfo()` also generally supports it, so any application using
> it properly will work fine with this.
> (eg. `ssh foo@fe80::1%eth0` works)