From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <t.lamprecht@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) server-digest SHA256)
 (No client certificate requested)
 by lists.proxmox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 2919F75DA5
 for <pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com>; Wed, 14 Jul 2021 07:38:36 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from firstgate.proxmox.com (localhost [127.0.0.1])
 by firstgate.proxmox.com (Proxmox) with ESMTP id 1CFCFB7BE
 for <pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com>; Wed, 14 Jul 2021 07:38:36 +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) server-digest SHA256)
 (No client certificate requested)
 by firstgate.proxmox.com (Proxmox) with ESMTPS id 07F14B7AD
 for <pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com>; Wed, 14 Jul 2021 07:38:35 +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 CA0854103A;
 Wed, 14 Jul 2021 07:38:28 +0200 (CEST)
Message-ID: <3ac18ec6-e4e2-e52e-a5a0-0949b4b6eccb@proxmox.com>
Date: Wed, 14 Jul 2021 07:38:06 +0200
MIME-Version: 1.0
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:90.0) Gecko/20100101
 Thunderbird/90.0
Content-Language: en-US
To: Proxmox VE development discussion <pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com>,
 alexandre derumier <aderumier@odiso.com>
References: <75efa993d34cb722b91d0a1b378664c3d026f2a9.camel@odiso.com>
From: Thomas Lamprecht <t.lamprecht@proxmox.com>
In-Reply-To: <75efa993d34cb722b91d0a1b378664c3d026f2a9.camel@odiso.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-SPAM-LEVEL: Spam detection results:  0
 AWL 0.632 Adjusted score from AWL reputation of From: address
 BAYES_00                 -1.9 Bayes spam probability is 0 to 1%
 KAM_DMARC_STATUS 0.01 Test Rule for DKIM or SPF Failure with Strict Alignment
 NICE_REPLY_A           -0.368 Looks like a legit reply (A)
 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] ifupdown2 "bridge_set_static_mac_from_port" policy
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, 14 Jul 2021 05:38:36 -0000

On 13.07.21 07:16, alexandre derumier wrote:
> Hi, 
> it seem that it's possible to enable some policy on bridge in ifupdown2
> 
> 
> cumulus linux distro for example, have this policy
> 
> $ cat /var/lib/ifupdown2/policy.d/bridge.json
> {
> "bridge": {
> "module_globals": {
> "warn_on_untagged_bridge_absence": "yes",
> "vxlan_bridge_default_igmp_snooping": "off",
> "allow_arp_nd_suppress_only_on_vxlan": "yes",
> "bridge_set_static_mac_from_port": "yes"
> },
> "defaults": {
> "bridge-stp": "on",
> "bridge-vlan-stats" : "on",
> "bridge-mcstats" : "on",
> "bridge-portprios": "8",
> "bridge-hashel": "4096",
> "bridge-hashmax": "4096",
> "bridge-ageing": "1800"
> }
> }
> }
> 
> 
> bridge_set_static_mac_from_port could be usefull to reuse physical
> interface mac on bridge.
> 

sounds good in theory, but to which port? As with more than one it's important
to be deterministic - that's why we had that kernel patch in the first place.