From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from firstgate.proxmox.com (firstgate.proxmox.com [IPv6:2a01:7e0:0:424::9]) by lore.proxmox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4D5191FF179 for ; Wed, 12 Nov 2025 21:38:18 +0100 (CET) Received: from firstgate.proxmox.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by firstgate.proxmox.com (Proxmox) with ESMTP id EA6CCCB6C; Wed, 12 Nov 2025 21:39:09 +0100 (CET) Message-ID: <2eda8ad5-3494-4a61-b8a2-34287df28452@proxmox.com> Date: Wed, 12 Nov 2025 21:39:05 +0100 MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird Beta To: Proxmox VE development discussion , Stefan Hanreich References: <20251107143201.689035-1-s.hanreich@proxmox.com> <20251107143201.689035-34-s.hanreich@proxmox.com> Content-Language: en-US From: Thomas Lamprecht In-Reply-To: <20251107143201.689035-34-s.hanreich@proxmox.com> X-Bm-Milter-Handled: 55990f41-d878-4baa-be0a-ee34c49e34d2 X-Bm-Transport-Timestamp: 1762979920772 X-SPAM-LEVEL: Spam detection results: 0 AWL -0.024 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 RCVD_IN_VALIDITY_CERTIFIED_BLOCKED 0.001 ADMINISTRATOR NOTICE: The query to Validity was blocked. See https://knowledge.validity.com/hc/en-us/articles/20961730681243 for more information. RCVD_IN_VALIDITY_RPBL_BLOCKED 0.001 ADMINISTRATOR NOTICE: The query to Validity was blocked. See https://knowledge.validity.com/hc/en-us/articles/20961730681243 for more information. RCVD_IN_VALIDITY_SAFE_BLOCKED 0.001 ADMINISTRATOR NOTICE: The query to Validity was blocked. See https://knowledge.validity.com/hc/en-us/articles/20961730681243 for more information. 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. [cluster.pm] Subject: Re: [pve-devel] [PATCH pve-manager v3 3/9] pvestatd: add network resource to status reporting X-BeenThere: pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Proxmox VE development discussion List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Reply-To: Proxmox VE development discussion Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Errors-To: pve-devel-bounces@lists.proxmox.com Sender: "pve-devel" Am 07.11.25 um 15:38 schrieb Stefan Hanreich: > diff --git a/PVE/API2/Cluster.pm b/PVE/API2/Cluster.pm > index 479803960..0c779bf9b 100644 > --- a/PVE/API2/Cluster.pm > +++ b/PVE/API2/Cluster.pm > @@ -251,7 +251,8 @@ __PACKAGE__->register_method({ > type => { > description => "Resource type.", > type => 'string', > - enum => ['node', 'storage', 'pool', 'qemu', 'lxc', 'openvz', 'sdn'], > + enum => > + ['node', 'storage', 'pool', 'qemu', 'lxc', 'openvz', 'sdn', 'network'], > }, > status => { > description => "Resource type dependent status.", > @@ -431,6 +432,23 @@ __PACKAGE__->register_method({ > optional => 1, > default => 0, > }, > + network => { > + description => "The name of a Network entity (for type 'network').", > + type => "string", > + optional => 1, > + }, > + network_type => { why not kebab-case like we strongly prefer in general for all new properties in the API? > + description => "The type of network resource (for type 'network').", > + type => "string", > + enum => ["fabric", "zone"], > + optional => 1, > + }, > + protocol => { > + description => > + "The protocol of a fabric (for type 'network', network_type 'fabric').", > + type => "string", > + optional => 1, > + }, > }, > }, > }, _______________________________________________ pve-devel mailing list pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com https://lists.proxmox.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pve-devel