From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from gate001.proxmox.com (gate001.proxmox.com [45.144.208.40]) by lore.proxmox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A31BC1FF0C1 for ; Wed, 26 Aug 2026 11:58:07 +0200 (CEST) Received: from gate001.proxmox.com (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by gate001.proxmox.com (Proxmox) with ESMTP id 13BA421324; Wed, 26 Aug 2026 11:58:07 +0200 (CEST) Date: Wed, 26 Aug 2026 11:58:02 +0200 From: Gabriel Goller To: Hannes Laimer Subject: Re: [PATCH pve-manager 2/2] ui: sdn: ipam: allow picking the nic instead of typing its MAC Message-ID: Mail-Followup-To: Hannes Laimer , pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com References: <20260819124407.856577-1-h.laimer@proxmox.com> <20260819124407.856577-3-h.laimer@proxmox.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20260819124407.856577-3-h.laimer@proxmox.com> User-Agent: NeoMutt/20260504 X-Bm-Milter-Handled: 55990f41-d878-4baa-be0a-ee34c49e34d2 X-Bm-Transport-Timestamp: 1787738250775 X-SPAM-LEVEL: Spam detection results: 0 AWL 0.581 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_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: FLFO6ODJSYBUDG62HFWKOHQR3X2Z4ZYX X-Message-ID-Hash: FLFO6ODJSYBUDG62HFWKOHQR3X2Z4ZYX 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: On 19.08.2026 14:44, Hannes Laimer wrote: > Instead of hand-copying a MAC from the guest's hardware panel, take a > guest and one of its NICs on the assignments's VNet, and fill the MAC in > from there. > > Setting a MAC without a guest stays possible, so this is purely a UX > improvement. We could also restrict this, so our IPAM only manages IPs > of guests in our SDN. > > Signed-off-by: Hannes Laimer > --- When selecting a vm and one of its nics, the mac address is filled in correctly but is not sent to the api. This creates an entry without a mac address, which cannot be deleted. The rest LGTM. > www/manager6/sdn/IpamEdit.js | 112 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- > 1 file changed, 109 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)