Re: [pve-devel] [PATCH container 1/1] Signed-off-by: Maurice Klein <klein@aetherus.de>

[Maurice Klein via pve-devel <pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com>]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: message/rfc822, Size: 6320 bytes --]

From: Maurice Klein <klein@aetherus.de>
To: pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com
Subject: Re: [pve-devel] [PATCH container 1/1] Signed-off-by: Maurice Klein <klein@aetherus.de>
Date: Wed, 21 Jan 2026 20:04:48 +0100
Message-ID: <d18928a0-6ab0-4e90-ad3a-0674bbdedb72@aetherus.de>

Hi,

Thanks for getting back to me!
I did sign a CLA and it is on record since 12.01.

I agree it would work nicely as a SDN plugin and I was also considering
that approach.
The problem I saw with that is that SDN relies on there being a bridge
for every zone and making it work without one seems to be a huge refactor.
Do you think the bridge should not be removed at all, even for a pure l3
routed setup?
It could also work with one bridge per guest but that would, in my
opinion, bring unnecessary overhead.

The motivation on my side comes from setups where L2 between guests is
not required at all, and where using routing protocols (OSPF, IS-IS, 
BGP) to the hosts
simplifies redundancy and failure handling significantly.

I'd love to get a conversation going on how something could be
implemented, and what would be the best way to go about it.



Mit freundlichen Grüßen,

Maurice Klein

Aetherus

TEL: 0212 7846460
Mail:Klein@aetherus.de


Am 19.01.26 um 15:35 schrieb Stefan Hanreich:
> Hi!
>
> Thanks for your contribution, did you already check out our guidelines
> [1] [2] and send a signed CLA? Without it, we cannot accept any
> contributions.
>
>
> I've looked at the proposal, but I wanted to take some time to think
> more about the general concept. It seems like you want to build
> something similar to current Kubernetes networking solutions that
> utilize BGP but without the whole EVPN / VXLAN stuff?
>
> Maybe it'd make more sense to discuss about how we could improve the
> EVPN zone or SDN in general to make such setups easier - potentially a
> new zone that is something of an inbetween of the simple zone and EVPN
> zone could make sense. In any case, I think removing the bridge and
> implementing it this way is the wrong way to go about this.
>
> [1]https://www.proxmox.com/en/about/open-source/developers
> [2]https://pve.proxmox.com/wiki/Developer_Documentation
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> pve-devel mailing list
> pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com
> https://lists.proxmox.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pve-devel
>



[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/plain, Size: 160 bytes --]

_______________________________________________
pve-devel mailing list
pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com
https://lists.proxmox.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pve-devel