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 9A2641FF140 for ; Fri, 27 Mar 2026 12:11:57 +0100 (CET) Received: from firstgate.proxmox.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by firstgate.proxmox.com (Proxmox) with ESMTP id 55824676D; Fri, 27 Mar 2026 12:12:18 +0100 (CET) Message-ID: <7995470d-3847-4db9-b298-3f3356eaa02c@proxmox.com> Date: Fri, 27 Mar 2026 12:12:14 +0100 MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird Subject: Re: [PATCH pve-network 08/13] evpn controller: add route_map_{in,out} parameter To: Hannes Laimer , pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com References: <20260325094142.174364-1-s.hanreich@proxmox.com> <20260325094142.174364-23-s.hanreich@proxmox.com> <04425c42-4037-4ce8-b81b-9c1eb0398373@proxmox.com> Content-Language: en-US From: Stefan Hanreich In-Reply-To: <04425c42-4037-4ce8-b81b-9c1eb0398373@proxmox.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-SPAM-LEVEL: Spam detection results: 0 AWL 0.709 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 Message-ID-Hash: Z4GD7MIPNA7ZTAGTMPBXLMNFXSUUG657 X-Message-ID-Hash: Z4GD7MIPNA7ZTAGTMPBXLMNFXSUUG657 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 List-Help: List-Owner: List-Post: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: On 3/27/26 11:43 AM, Hannes Laimer wrote: > in `generate_zone_frr_config` we probably also want to use the newly > introduced `route-map-[in|out]` parameter, not the hard coded ones hmm, that one is actually a bit tricky, at least without my upcoming patch series that allows defining multiple EVPN controllers with different route-maps and node constraints, since this needs to be applied only on the exit nodes, Not sure if we want to extend the user-defined route map here, since - depending on the user-defined route-map - we cannot ensure that this will actually happen. We could instead create a pre-defined route map here, apply the set actions and then jump into the user-defined route map. That would kind of defeat the purpose of being able to define custom route maps - so I'm a bit torn on how to proceed here. Will have to think more about this...