From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <d.csapak@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))
 (No client certificate requested)
 by lists.proxmox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A2B9C9ED29
 for <pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com>; Wed,  7 Jun 2023 13:49:48 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from firstgate.proxmox.com (localhost [127.0.0.1])
 by firstgate.proxmox.com (Proxmox) with ESMTP id 8309718F15
 for <pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com>; Wed,  7 Jun 2023 13:49:18 +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))
 (No client certificate requested)
 by firstgate.proxmox.com (Proxmox) with ESMTPS
 for <pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com>; Wed,  7 Jun 2023 13:49:18 +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 C80D141E78
 for <pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com>; Wed,  7 Jun 2023 13:49:17 +0200 (CEST)
Message-ID: <7e8b643e-f04e-1ed9-673a-41ba0073a129@proxmox.com>
Date: Wed, 7 Jun 2023 13:49:17 +0200
MIME-Version: 1.0
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:102.0) Gecko/20100101
 Thunderbird/102.9.1
Content-Language: en-US
To: Thomas Lamprecht <t.lamprecht@proxmox.com>,
 Proxmox VE development discussion <pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com>,
 Wolfgang Bumiller <w.bumiller@proxmox.com>
References: <20230606130851.260129-1-d.csapak@proxmox.com>
 <20230606130851.260129-5-d.csapak@proxmox.com>
 <ahagijd5qjhdob54g4slo72hzooqlljhpumfev6mt4ty6lsirw@7g66z7ljp4nv>
 <27f9be2e-dd66-98c4-f873-e7643e046c9a@proxmox.com>
From: Dominik Csapak <d.csapak@proxmox.com>
In-Reply-To: <27f9be2e-dd66-98c4-f873-e7643e046c9a@proxmox.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-SPAM-LEVEL: Spam detection results:  0
 AWL 0.062 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
 NICE_REPLY_A           -0.094 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
 T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE    -0.01 -
Subject: Re: [pve-devel] applied: [PATCH http-server v3 1/2] proxy request:
 forward json content type and parameters
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, 07 Jun 2023 11:49:48 -0000



On 6/7/23 13:47, Thomas Lamprecht wrote:
> Am 07/06/2023 um 13:23 schrieb Wolfgang Bumiller:
>> applied both & bumped dependency for pve-common
>>
> 
> Isn't this breaking older common too?
> 

no it just forwards the parameters to either the daemon or the other 
nodes as json if the proxy received it as json, should not have
any other effects...