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 000D11FF17C for <inbox@lore.proxmox.com>; Wed, 2 Apr 2025 11:16:43 +0200 (CEST) Received: from firstgate.proxmox.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by firstgate.proxmox.com (Proxmox) with ESMTP id C80A5D36D; Wed, 2 Apr 2025 11:16:31 +0200 (CEST) Date: Wed, 02 Apr 2025 11:16:28 +0200 Message-Id: <D8W1FPOIP04T.1HPCJQ2R7OH08@proxmox.com> From: "Christoph Heiss" <c.heiss@proxmox.com> To: "Gabriel Goller" <g.goller@proxmox.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: aerc 0.20.1 References: <20250328171340.885413-1-g.goller@proxmox.com> <20250328171340.885413-53-g.goller@proxmox.com> <D8W0V7A166IQ.12UUD63VWDJAA@proxmox.com> <mqlwud75ugovnx3j67bhhkej53kp7boun7g26gyb7j42iuf2jx@x7miazl2j3hg> In-Reply-To: <mqlwud75ugovnx3j67bhhkej53kp7boun7g26gyb7j42iuf2jx@x7miazl2j3hg> X-SPAM-LEVEL: Spam detection results: 0 AWL 0.031 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] [PATCH pve-docs 1/1] fabrics: add initial documentation for sdn fabrics 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> Cc: 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> On Wed Apr 2, 2025 at 11:09 AM CEST, Gabriel Goller wrote: [..] >>> +Interfaces:: Specify the interfaces used to establish peering connections with >>> +other OpenFabric nodes. Preferably select interfaces without pre-assigned IP >>> +addresses, then configure addresses in the IPv4/IPv6 column if needed. A dummy >>> +"loopback" interface with the router-id is automatically created. >>> +Interface-specific settings override the global fabric settings. >>> + >>> +The following optional parameters can be configured per interface when enabling >>> +the additional columns: >> >>Perhaps this sentence should be made a bit more prominent, e.g. as >>sub-heading? It's easy to read over it and miss it, but it's quite >>important piece of information. Especially if your not *that* familiar >>with the UI and enablable columns. >> >>There are advanced options, so hiding them by default is good IMO - just >>a bit confusing to have big headings with the option names but nowhere >>to enable them (directly). > > I thought about adding section (even though this is not exactly a > different panel in the UI), e.g., > > On The Interface > ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ > > So we'd have: > OpenFabric > - On the Node > - On the Interface > - On the Fabric > > and obviously the same with OSPF. > > What do you think? Yeah, sounds good to me! Makes it clear(er) what settings belong to what part of the fabric and hopefully avoid confusion as to where to configure each setting exactly. _______________________________________________ pve-devel mailing list pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com https://lists.proxmox.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pve-devel