From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from firstgate.proxmox.com (firstgate.proxmox.com [212.224.123.68]) by lore.proxmox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 55BFB1FF140 for ; Fri, 27 Mar 2026 12:21:35 +0100 (CET) Received: from firstgate.proxmox.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by firstgate.proxmox.com (Proxmox) with ESMTP id 664D670CE; Fri, 27 Mar 2026 12:21:56 +0100 (CET) Message-ID: <283f6402-96c2-4d9f-bdc1-b6112bf032f9@proxmox.com> Date: Fri, 27 Mar 2026 12:21:52 +0100 MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird Subject: Re: [PATCH proxmox-ve-rs 8/9] ve-config: frr: implement frr config generation for route maps To: Hannes Laimer , pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com References: <20260325094142.174364-1-s.hanreich@proxmox.com> <20260325094142.174364-11-s.hanreich@proxmox.com> Content-Language: en-US From: Stefan Hanreich In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-SPAM-LEVEL: Spam detection results: 0 AWL 0.710 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 Message-ID-Hash: 5N2PLIWYWN7GB6PDVWA33O6DQ3I3TRV2 X-Message-ID-Hash: 5N2PLIWYWN7GB6PDVWA33O6DQ3I3TRV2 X-MailFrom: s.hanreich@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: On 3/27/26 12:16 PM, Hannes Laimer wrote: [snip] >> + /// Add a list of Route Map Entries to a [`FrrConfig`]. >> + /// >> + /// This method takes a list of Route Map Entries and adds them to given FRR configuration. >> + /// Existing Route Map entries with the same name, but different ordering number will remain in >> + /// the configuration. Entries with the same ordering will get merged. >> + /// >> + /// This behavior is different from Prefix Lists, where we overwrite existing Prefix Lists in >> + /// the FRR configuration. The reason for this is that users can override the Route Map setting >> + /// in the EVPN controller. >> + pub fn build_frr_route_maps( >> + config: impl IntoIterator, >> + frr_config: &mut FrrConfig, >> + ) -> Result<(), anyhow::Error> { >> + for route_map in config.into_iter() { >> + let RouteMap::RouteMapEntry(route_map) = route_map; >> + let route_map_name = RouteMapName::new(route_map.id.route_map_id.to_string()); >> + >> + if let Some(frr_route_map) = frr_config.routemaps.get_mut(&route_map_name) { >> + let idx = >> + frr_route_map.partition_point(|element| element.seq <= route_map.id().order()); >> + frr_route_map.insert(idx, route_map.into()); > > with this we would end up having multiple entries with the same seq, frr > doesn't care, just bringing it up cause the doc mentions merging yeah, the FRR merging logic is what's being relied upon here, i.e.: berserker# configure berserker(config)# route-map test permit 123 berserker(config-route-map)# match evpn vni 1111 berserker(config-route-map)# exit berserker(config)# route-map test permit 123 berserker(config-route-map)# set metric 1111 berserker(config-route-map)# exit berserker(config)# exit berserker# show running-config [...] route-map test permit 123 match evpn vni 1111 set metric 1111 exit ! [...] ------ I'll make sure to make this clearer in the documentation!