From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from gate001.proxmox.com (gate001.proxmox.com [IPv6:2a0f:8001:1:32::40]) by lore.proxmox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id BE5ED1FF0C1 for ; Wed, 26 Aug 2026 11:25:09 +0200 (CEST) Received: from gate001.proxmox.com (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by gate001.proxmox.com (Proxmox) with ESMTP id C748D21351; Wed, 26 Aug 2026 11:25:08 +0200 (CEST) Date: Wed, 26 Aug 2026 11:25:06 +0200 From: Gabriel Goller To: Hannes Laimer Subject: Re: [PATCH pve-network] sdn: ipam: fix dual-stack per-MAC lookup in the PVE plugin Message-ID: Mail-Followup-To: Hannes Laimer , pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com References: <20260824134244.1066515-1-h.laimer@proxmox.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20260824134244.1066515-1-h.laimer@proxmox.com> User-Agent: NeoMutt/20260504 X-Bm-Milter-Handled: 55990f41-d878-4baa-be0a-ee34c49e34d2 X-Bm-Transport-Timestamp: 1787736274926 X-SPAM-LEVEL: Spam detection results: 0 AWL 0.600 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: EKTZGFIWBQLHIRP7GEXPKQN6DZUFQCIB X-Message-ID-Hash: EKTZGFIWBQLHIRP7GEXPKQN6DZUFQCIB 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 24.08.2026 15:42, Hannes Laimer wrote: > The subnet loop skipped every remaining subnet once a v6 address was > found, dropping a v4 record living in a later subnet. Which subnet comes > first is hash order, so in a dual-stack zone the v4 half of the answer > went missing at random. The intended v4 short-circuit never fired > either, since subnet keys are CIDR strings and ip_is_ipv4 returns false > for those. > > Skip a subnet only when its own family is already answered. > > Signed-off-by: Hannes Laimer LGTM. Reviewed-by: Gabriel Goller > --- > src/PVE/Network/SDN/Ipams/PVEPlugin.pm | 5 +++-- > 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)