From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from firstgate.proxmox.com (firstgate.proxmox.com [IPv6:2a01:7e0:0:424::9]) by lore.proxmox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A6C7E1FF14F for ; Fri, 08 May 2026 15:33:12 +0200 (CEST) Received: from firstgate.proxmox.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by firstgate.proxmox.com (Proxmox) with ESMTP id 496E0197A0; Fri, 8 May 2026 15:33:11 +0200 (CEST) Date: Fri, 8 May 2026 15:33:07 +0200 From: Gabriel Goller To: Stefan Hanreich Subject: Re: [PATCH docs/manager/network/proxmox-ve-rs v2 00/18] Extend EVPN controller functionality Message-ID: <4idehi5z4brczmlpx4azwhfvgbypqhpyrjdqkwlpjtn77q7qb2@7m7iipqlvibg> Mail-Followup-To: Stefan Hanreich , pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com References: <20260504162501.425135-1-s.hanreich@proxmox.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20260504162501.425135-1-s.hanreich@proxmox.com> User-Agent: NeoMutt/20241002-35-39f9a6 X-Bm-Milter-Handled: 55990f41-d878-4baa-be0a-ee34c49e34d2 X-Bm-Transport-Timestamp: 1778247079122 X-SPAM-LEVEL: Spam detection results: 0 AWL 0.029 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 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: LH7ITMGAFKMCBCD35YJLRA5OFWVB7GWP X-Message-ID-Hash: LH7ITMGAFKMCBCD35YJLRA5OFWVB7GWP X-MailFrom: g.goller@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: pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com X-Mailman-Version: 3.3.10 Precedence: list List-Id: Proxmox VE development discussion List-Help: List-Owner: List-Post: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: The "update-source" generation here is a bit weird. When having bgp controllers + multiple evpn controllers, and have "loopback interface" set on the bgp controller, we set `update-source ` on both neighbor groups (both evpn controllers). This doesn't work if your two evpn controllers have peers that are in different subnets, because then the wrong source address will be chosen. We can fix this by setting the `update-source` property only when the 'Legacy' mode on the evpn controller is on. AFAICS we automatically select the correct source address anyway as the source should be in the route inserted by the underlay.