From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from gate001.proxmox.com (gate001.proxmox.com [45.144.208.40]) by lore.proxmox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A0D1F1FF0E3 for ; Tue, 27 Oct 2026 10:00:03 +0100 (CET) Received: from gate001.proxmox.com (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by gate001.proxmox.com (Proxmox) with ESMTP id 06E1D2197E; Tue, 27 Oct 2026 09:56:37 +0100 (CET) From: Hannes Laimer To: pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com Subject: [PATCH pve-network v3 30/45] sdn: microseg: expose the fragments rule option Date: Tue, 27 Oct 2026 09:55:12 +0100 Message-ID: <20261027085527.702738-31-h.laimer@proxmox.com> X-Mailer: git-send-email 2.47.3 In-Reply-To: <20261027085527.702738-1-h.laimer@proxmox.com> References: <20261027085527.702738-1-h.laimer@proxmox.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Bm-Milter-Handled: 55990f41-d878-4baa-be0a-ee34c49e34d2 X-Bm-Transport-Timestamp: 1793091366085 X-SPAM-LEVEL: Spam detection results: 0 AWL 0.334 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: O4RJK7FBY6PHYP67VLHWRQTXLC4KNVOQ X-Message-ID-Hash: O4RJK7FBY6PHYP67VLHWRQTXLC4KNVOQ X-MailFrom: h.laimer@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 X-Mailman-Version: 3.3.10 Precedence: list List-Id: Proxmox VE development discussion List-Help: List-Owner: List-Post: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: A rule narrowed to a protocol or a macro never matches the later fragments of a datagram. Where only such rules allow traffic between a sender and a receiver, a fragmented datagram does not arrive whole. Expose the option that narrows a rule to those fragments. Signed-off-by: Hannes Laimer --- src/PVE/Network/SDN/Microseg.pm | 12 ++++++++++++ 1 file changed, 12 insertions(+) diff --git a/src/PVE/Network/SDN/Microseg.pm b/src/PVE/Network/SDN/Microseg.pm index 0732577dc42d..f10b2e2ea36c 100644 --- a/src/PVE/Network/SDN/Microseg.pm +++ b/src/PVE/Network/SDN/Microseg.pm @@ -186,6 +186,18 @@ sub rule_properties { description => "A firewall macro standing in for the protocol, ports and ICMP type." . " Cannot be combined with them.", }; + $properties->{fragments} = { + type => 'boolean', + optional => 1, + default => 0, + description => + "Restrict the rule to non-first IP fragments, of the given protocol or" + . " of any. They carry no ports and no ICMP type, so only a protocol can narrow" + . " them, and no other narrowed rule matches them. An IPv6 fragment counts under" + . " the protocol its fragment header names. Where that is an extension header, a" + . " rule narrowed to the transport protocol does not match it, one without a" + . " protocol does.", + }; $properties->{src} = { type => 'array', items => get_standard_option('pve-sdn-microseg-id'), -- 2.47.3