From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: <s.hanreich@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)) (No client certificate requested) by lists.proxmox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id EF3EB90EC6 for <pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com>; Wed, 3 Apr 2024 10:15:52 +0200 (CEST) Received: from firstgate.proxmox.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by firstgate.proxmox.com (Proxmox) with ESMTP id CFA3C1392C for <pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com>; Wed, 3 Apr 2024 10:15:52 +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)) (No client certificate requested) by firstgate.proxmox.com (Proxmox) with ESMTPS for <pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com>; Wed, 3 Apr 2024 10:15:52 +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 F1E1444C5F for <pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com>; Wed, 3 Apr 2024 10:15:51 +0200 (CEST) Message-ID: <0e92f09d-6bd4-49f3-ac68-1845f33d1a6c@proxmox.com> Date: Wed, 3 Apr 2024 10:15:51 +0200 MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird To: pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com References: <20240402171629.536804-1-s.hanreich@proxmox.com> <mailman.56.1712124362.450.pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com> Content-Language: en-US From: Stefan Hanreich <s.hanreich@proxmox.com> In-Reply-To: <mailman.56.1712124362.450.pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-SPAM-LEVEL: Spam detection results: 0 AWL 0.589 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 Subject: Re: [pve-devel] [RFC container/firewall/manager/proxmox-firewall/qemu-server 00/37] proxmox firewall nftables implementation 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: Wed, 03 Apr 2024 08:15:53 -0000 On 4/3/24 08:05, DERUMIER, Alexandre via pve-devel wrote: > Personnaly, I'm not sure than using reject / tcp-reset in a bridged is > a good idea. (Even if personally I'm using it production, I don't have > problem to switch to DROP, if I can avoid other problems) Yes, I tend to agree. But there certainly will be users who want to use REJECT for guest firewalls and it certainly makes sense to support that - especially since we have supported it since the beginning. It's hard to take away features. I also feel like this is something a firewall should support one way or another and if it's not there we are missing a really basic feature. > Maybe it is time to disable dynamic mac-learning by default ? > The code is already here and works fine. > > AFAIK, other hypervisor like vmware disable port flooding by default > with static mac registration too. Might be a good idea, although it still wouldn't solve the problem - sadly (since we're still not allowed to do REJECT then).