From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <pve-devel-bounces@lists.proxmox.com>
Received: from gate001.proxmox.com (gate001.proxmox.com [IPv6:2a0f:8001:1:32::40])
	by lore.proxmox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id B66A61FF0B4
	for <inbox@lore.proxmox.com>; Wed, 09 Sep 2026 10:06:10 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from gate001.proxmox.com (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1])
	by gate001.proxmox.com (Proxmox) with ESMTP id F32A52157E;
	Wed, 09 Sep 2026 10:06:07 +0200 (CEST)
Message-ID: <78ae2a30-c64d-47de-937a-f1cf38f9a9cb@proxmox.com>
Date: Wed, 9 Sep 2026 10:06:02 +0200
MIME-Version: 1.0
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird
Subject: Re: [PATCH] sdn: evpn: allow vlan-aware vnets
To: "DERUMIER, Alexandre" <alexandre.derumier@groupe-cyllene.com>,
 "pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com" <pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com>
References: <apnrUDqiauznKjnF@glanzmann.de>
 <d073da2f-dc42-42af-8c13-4c360b7c882b@proxmox.com>
 <06a5831f0c8de47dc97614be9395940682117d3f.camel@groupe-cyllene.com>
Content-Language: en-US
From: Stefan Hanreich <s.hanreich@proxmox.com>
In-Reply-To: 
 <06a5831f0c8de47dc97614be9395940682117d3f.camel@groupe-cyllene.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-SPAM-LEVEL: Spam detection results:  0
	AWL                     0.875 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)
	KAM_SHORT               0.001 Use of a URL Shortener for very short URL
	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: AAC5577DW7K367NTWPLTB4SSPNIPZSXT
X-Message-ID-Hash: AAC5577DW7K367NTWPLTB4SSPNIPZSXT
X-MailFrom: s.hanreich@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 <pve-devel.lists.proxmox.com>
List-Help: <mailto:pve-devel-request@lists.proxmox.com?subject=help>
List-Owner: <mailto:pve-devel-owner@lists.proxmox.com>
List-Post: <mailto:pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com>
List-Subscribe: <mailto:pve-devel-join@lists.proxmox.com>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:pve-devel-leave@lists.proxmox.com>

On 9/9/26 6:52 AM, DERUMIER, Alexandre wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> they are also another way (that work with vxlan, but I'm not sure with
> evpn),
> 
> https://docs.nvidia.com/networking-ethernet-software/cumulus-linux-515/Network-Virtualization/VXLAN-Devices/
> https://blog.vyos.io/evpn-vxlan-enhancements-introducing-single-vxlan-device-support
> https://github.com/FRRouting/frr/pull/12364
> 
> it's mapping vlan tags from a vlan aware bridge to vnis, and transport
> them in a single vxlan interface.
> 
> 
> It was pretty new and buggy 5year ago, so I never tried to implemented
> it,
> maybe it could be interesting to look at it.

Yes, we were discussing this as well in order to implement the VLAN-based
approach - @Gabriel has tested it internally already and it seemed to
work quite well from what he said. For the other approach with VLAN
tags inside the VXLAN packet the current workaround is needed though.