From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: <proxmox@giftfish.de> 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 9AEFB6121E for <pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com>; Fri, 4 Sep 2020 17:21:57 +0200 (CEST) Received: from firstgate.proxmox.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by firstgate.proxmox.com (Proxmox) with ESMTP id 81FF7224E1 for <pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com>; Fri, 4 Sep 2020 17:21:27 +0200 (CEST) Received: from mx.giftfish.de (mx.giftfish.de [176.9.239.230]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-CHACHA20-POLY1305 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by firstgate.proxmox.com (Proxmox) with ESMTPS id 6B0A0224CC for <pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com>; Fri, 4 Sep 2020 17:21:26 +0200 (CEST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=giftfish.de; s=dkim; t=1599232884; h=from:from:sender:sender:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date: message-id:message-id:to:to:cc:mime-version:mime-version: content-type:content-type; bh=susPDUZ2k6Y7JgShhpN8G5UEwG+kStuyhrFjIyyh64s=; b=dABvYaA+pPAflv10RhA1I4dJCEXiEh2fu5j2iKZc8X2vJCX6F4+U1GudtZhrz9jT8p9VT4 ispSLC+tEq+T2eMigDNkJbOpVbOyJFbnzq6a0k4ZvckaMSo4GTYqxurwc44MGlSA0APJm/ P9iBGvqTYxWHV8p1/ReomXGRXGfVjKbNVQu2J9yaiuOYzd6/nzxshkpiGyhqaEWK1aN0lc eE6PxF9hFokrYacLaDy8sXu15KbwEPJHkDWFnkEJ54h/JYiX6Jt+0JJXdb4SHItV4TvOUn 0nN51QoLenAzqJvKAZ860icAwFvJ6yM/bKy4/bNB4LOT9HB3SbWLK1LZH8HVkQ== Received: by mx.giftfish.de (OpenSMTPD) with ESMTP id bf0410b9 for <pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com>; Fri, 4 Sep 2020 17:21:24 +0200 (CEST) Received: by mx.giftfish.de (kopano-spooler) with MAPI; Fri, 4 Sep 2020 17:21:24 +0200 From: "proxmox" <proxmox@giftfish.de> To: =?us-ascii?Q?pve-devel=40lists=2Eproxmox=2Ecom?= <pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com> Date: Fri, 4 Sep 2020 15:21:24 +0000 Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Priority: 3 (Normal) Sender: "Marius Schellenberger" <marius@giftfish.de> Message-Id: <kcRK.AAAAAAJZh+74Ak+ZgfTuugd5TBgBAAAABQAAAC9qJF5oxmZOmbnepn3tg6UAAAAA.ADLiDM+C1gE=@mx.giftfish.de> X-SPAM-LEVEL: Spam detection results: 0 AWL 0.130 Adjusted score from AWL reputation of From: address DKIM_SIGNED 0.1 Message has a DKIM or DK signature, not necessarily valid DKIM_VALID -0.1 Message has at least one valid DKIM or DK signature DKIM_VALID_AU -0.1 Message has a valid DKIM or DK signature from author's domain DKIM_VALID_EF -0.1 Message has a valid DKIM or DK signature from envelope-from domain HTML_MESSAGE 0.001 HTML included in message 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. [hetzner.cloud, giftfish.de] Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Content-Filtered-By: Mailman/MimeDel 2.1.29 Subject: Re: [pve-devel] [PATCH qemu-server] api: cloud-init support for mtu and userdata 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: Fri, 04 Sep 2020 15:21:57 -0000 Hello I didn't know this patch mail got approved, so sorry for the (very) late = response. My intention for not going with snippets was the fact that they could not= be created via the API and one would have to manually create a file on t= he target machine for cloud-init userdata. One possible use case was to spin up a kubernetes cluster on proxmox only= via API. I wanted to have something similar to the hetzner cloud API where the ful= l userdata can be submitted for VM provisioning: https://docs.hetzner.cloud/#servers-create-a-server So going further here you want me to submit the MTU patches separately=3F= Should I integrate userdata into the cicustom field=3F I thought this wou= ld make things more complex in favor of parsing out the base64 stuff. So = I would still go with an extra field. Thoughts=3F