From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <pve-devel-bounces@lists.proxmox.com>
Received: from firstgate.proxmox.com (firstgate.proxmox.com [IPv6:2a01:7e0:0:424::9])
	by lore.proxmox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 6E1561FF163
	for <inbox@lore.proxmox.com>; Thu,  5 Dec 2024 17:51:01 +0100 (CET)
Received: from firstgate.proxmox.com (localhost [127.0.0.1])
	by firstgate.proxmox.com (Proxmox) with ESMTP id 70D921EFAD;
	Thu,  5 Dec 2024 17:51:00 +0100 (CET)
Message-ID: <59f7c975-2de5-4e6a-a2db-e650f0306563@proxmox.com>
Date: Thu, 5 Dec 2024 17:50:56 +0100
MIME-Version: 1.0
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird
To: Proxmox VE development discussion <pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com>
References: <mailman.831.1732813825.391.pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com>
Content-Language: en-US
From: Stefan Hanreich <s.hanreich@proxmox.com>
In-Reply-To: <mailman.831.1732813825.391.pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com>
X-SPAM-LEVEL: Spam detection results:  0
 AWL 0.662 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
Subject: Re: [pve-devel] SPAM: [PATCH pve-network 0/2] fix #5949
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>
Reply-To: Proxmox VE development discussion <pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Errors-To: pve-devel-bounces@lists.proxmox.com
Sender: "pve-devel" <pve-devel-bounces@lists.proxmox.com>

This patch series would change the behavior of zones with DHCP enabled
as follows:

Currently you need to explicitly configure a DHCP range, otherwise DHCP
doesn't work. With this patch series, an IP *always* gets allocated in
the IPAM when DHCP is enabled and served via DHCP.

This is an okay change in behavior I'd say, since it makes it easier to
just use DHCP if you want to manage the whole prefix via DHCP. We should
probably document it though.
It would also change the behavior for current setups that have DHCP
enabled, but no DHCP-Range configured. Might be a fringe case, but maybe
still worth to consider since those users would suddenly have a DHCP
server running on their PVE node when they re-apply the SDN configuration.


Another thing I noticed while testing:

Since we now use add_next_freeip() as well, this function does not save
the VMID in the PVE IPAM, leading to entries with no VMID and hostname
(see PVEPlugin). Would be nice if we added that as well to the
add_next_freeip() function - it already is there in add_range_next_freeip()


_______________________________________________
pve-devel mailing list
pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com
https://lists.proxmox.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pve-devel