From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <c.heiss@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) server-digest SHA256)
(No client certificate requested)
by lists.proxmox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 45FB79C3FF
for <pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com>; Tue, 24 Oct 2023 09:45:34 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from firstgate.proxmox.com (localhost [127.0.0.1])
by firstgate.proxmox.com (Proxmox) with ESMTP id 2814B1C8DD
for <pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com>; Tue, 24 Oct 2023 09:45:04 +0200 (CEST)
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) server-digest SHA256)
(No client certificate requested)
by firstgate.proxmox.com (Proxmox) with ESMTPS
for <pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com>; Tue, 24 Oct 2023 09:45:02 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from proxmox-new.maurer-it.com (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1])
by proxmox-new.maurer-it.com (Proxmox) with ESMTP id 44F6644944
for <pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com>; Tue, 24 Oct 2023 09:45:02 +0200 (CEST)
Date: Tue, 24 Oct 2023 09:45:01 +0200
From: Christoph Heiss <c.heiss@proxmox.com>
To: Thomas Lamprecht <t.lamprecht@proxmox.com>
Cc: Proxmox VE development discussion <pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com>
Message-ID: <ft5v3hfgdgmxrkfdwi2kistzhr7sclt2ffh2gpniwt3qmjw64i@hvf33viizktz>
References: <20231020094651.432513-1-c.heiss@proxmox.com>
<df0ef220-117d-4080-a082-10bd0a8f52a7@proxmox.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <df0ef220-117d-4080-a082-10bd0a8f52a7@proxmox.com>
X-SPAM-LEVEL: Spam detection results: 0
AWL -0.021 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
URIBL_BLOCKED 0.001 ADMINISTRATOR NOTICE: The query to URIBL was blocked. See
http://wiki.apache.org/spamassassin/DnsBlocklists#dnsbl-block for more
information. [ietf.org]
Subject: Re: [pve-devel] applied-series: [PATCH installer 0/5] use hostname
from DHCP lease if available
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, 24 Oct 2023 07:45:34 -0000
On Fri, Oct 20, 2023 at 05:21:41PM +0200, Thomas Lamprecht wrote:
>
> Am 20/10/2023 um 11:46 schrieb Christoph Heiss:
> > DHCP servers can set option 12 ("host-name") for client leases [0],
> > telling them about their hostname. It's very much non-invasive and falls
> > back to the default values as done currently.
> >
> > This came up while talking to Aaron, which he noticed (esp. during
> > trainings) that this would be a very useful feature too have.
> >
> > I have tested this with the "host-name" entry set and unset, as well as
> > any combinations of that with the domain name being set or unset.
> >
> > [0] https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/rfc2132#section-3.14
> > [..]
>
> applied series, squashed in a trivial fix to fix the tests though, you
> probably based of an older git state where the Interface struct doesn't
> have the "state" member yet, thanks!
Yeah, exactly. Sorry about that - thanks for fixing it up & applying!