From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: <s.lendl@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 F11989BA40 for <pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com>; Tue, 21 Nov 2023 12:23:49 +0100 (CET) Received: from firstgate.proxmox.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by firstgate.proxmox.com (Proxmox) with ESMTP id C920C75DE for <pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com>; Tue, 21 Nov 2023 12:23:19 +0100 (CET) Received: from proxmox-new.maurer-it.com (proxmox-new.maurer-it.com [94.136.29.106]) (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 for <pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com>; Tue, 21 Nov 2023 12:23:19 +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 0087240F4D; Tue, 21 Nov 2023 12:23:19 +0100 (CET) From: Stefan Lendl <s.lendl@proxmox.com> To: "DERUMIER, Alexandre" <alexandre.derumier@groupe-cyllene.com>, "pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com" <pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com> In-Reply-To: <a0354bc8ad0c119bbd4386ff38fc10a596963818.camel@groupe-cyllene.com> References: <20231117114011.834002-1-s.hanreich@proxmox.com> <a0354bc8ad0c119bbd4386ff38fc10a596963818.camel@groupe-cyllene.com> Date: Tue, 21 Nov 2023 12:23:18 +0100 Message-ID: <87jzqbe4ex.fsf@gmail.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-SPAM-LEVEL: Spam detection results: 0 AWL 0.058 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 T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE -0.01 - Subject: Re: [pve-devel] [PATCH v4 cluster/network/manager/qemu-server/container/docs 00/33] Add support for DHCP servers to SDN 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: Tue, 21 Nov 2023 11:23:50 -0000 "DERUMIER, Alexandre" <alexandre.derumier@groupe-cyllene.com> writes: >>>=C2=A0 * dnsmasq and IPv6 (and DHCP in general) do not really play well >>>together, >>>=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0 so using subnets with IPv6 configured is wonky > > I didn't have tested yet, but it's seem that dnsmasq only support old > classic duid reservation and not mac ? > I tested the DHCPv6 setup now and unfortunately it does not work fully. I have a VNet with both IPv4 and IPv6 subnets. The IPAM part works correctly, registering both IPv4 and IPv6. In the VM I can get an IPv4 from the DHCP but IPv6 does not work. I only get a /128 address but I configured a /64 subnet. For dual stack as well as only IPv6. Here my setup for only IPv6: subnet.cfg: subnet: DHCPNAT3-dead:beef::-64 vnet dhcpnat3 dhcp-range start-address=3Ddead:beef::100,end-address=3Ddead:beef::200 gateway dead:beef::1 Upon adding a VM, I get an IP [dead:beef::100] ethers file looks correct according to your syntax with: BC:24:11:24:5F:AD,[dead:beef::100] In a VM (archiso) I run `dhclient -6 ens19`, and get the following IP assigned: dead:beef::100/128