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 [45.144.208.40])
	by lore.proxmox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A05051FF0E1
	for <inbox@lore.proxmox.com>; Mon, 27 Jul 2026 10:33:34 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from gate001.proxmox.com (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1])
	by gate001.proxmox.com (Proxmox) with ESMTP id 43A1B2139E;
	Mon, 27 Jul 2026 10:33:34 +0200 (CEST)
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Date: Mon, 27 Jul 2026 10:33:30 +0200
Message-Id: <DK97QUP9PLZE.2V260QNGEKVN5@proxmox.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH network v3 1/5] sdn: evpn: enable force_forwarding for
 ipv6 forwarding to subnets
From: "Lukas Sichert" <l.sichert@proxmox.com>
To: "Stefan Hanreich" <s.hanreich@proxmox.com>,
 <pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com>
References: <20260619154017.167720-1-l.sichert@proxmox.com>
 <20260619154017.167720-2-l.sichert@proxmox.com>
 <f7dbcb5b-0965-4198-9547-a86d662a4f14@proxmox.com>
In-Reply-To: <f7dbcb5b-0965-4198-9547-a86d662a4f14@proxmox.com>
X-Bm-Milter-Handled: 55990f41-d878-4baa-be0a-ee34c49e34d2
X-Bm-Transport-Timestamp: 1785141176027
X-SPAM-LEVEL: Spam detection results:  0
	AWL                     0.083 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)
	RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW        -0.7 Sender listed at https://www.dnswl.org/,
 low 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: RTKRI4O4CSFXTKLE6ZSB7DFV5GDSSKV2
X-Message-ID-Hash: RTKRI4O4CSFXTKLE6ZSB7DFV5GDSSKV2
X-MailFrom: l.sichert@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 2026-06-25 11:47, Stefan Hanreich <s.hanreich@proxmox.com> wrote:

>
>
> On 6/19/26 5:41 PM, Lukas Sichert wrote:

>> @@ -333,6 +347,15 @@ sub generate_sdn_config {
>>              push @iface_config, "bridge_fd 0";
>>              push @iface_config, "mtu $mtu" if $mtu;
>>              push @iface_config, "vrf $vrf_iface";
>> +
>> +            if ($enable_forward_v6) {
>> +                push @iface_config, 'ip6-forward on';
>
> Is there a reason why there's now an ip6-forward statement on the vrfbr
> as well? Is this to get router-behavior on the vrfbr as well (which was
> previously the case because of the global setting?). Would be good to
> have a clearer explanation for why this is needed in the commit message.

You are right, it is unnecessary. I will remove it in a v4.

>> +
>> +                push @iface_config,
>> +                    "post-up echo 1 > /proc/sys/net/ipv6/conf/$brvrf/fo=
rce_forwarding";
>> +                push @iface_config,
>> +                    "post-down echo 0 > /proc/sys/net/ipv6/conf/$brvrf/=
force_forwarding";
>> +            }
>>              push(@{ $config->{$brvrf} }, @iface_config) if !$config->{$=
brvrf};
>>          }
>> =20