From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from gate001.proxmox.com (gate001.proxmox.com [45.144.208.40]) by lore.proxmox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 2078C1FF0C0 for ; Wed, 04 Nov 2026 13:36:58 +0100 (CET) Received: from gate001.proxmox.com (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by gate001.proxmox.com (Proxmox) with ESMTP id 986C6211F1; Wed, 04 Nov 2026 13:36:57 +0100 (CET) Message-ID: Date: Wed, 4 Nov 2026 13:36:53 +0100 MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird Subject: Re: [PATCH proxmox-ebpf v5 0/5] add proxmox-ebpf library To: Thomas Lamprecht , Hannes Laimer , =?UTF-8?Q?Fabian_Gr=C3=BCnbichler?= , pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com References: <20261102150047.1584789-1-h.laimer@proxmox.com> <7826f3d1-4f90-411c-ba45-8bff7ef8a214@proxmox.com> <6a66dba5-d94f-4159-a761-9a66d17cd567@proxmox.com> <1793787660.v1i7061h5x.astroid@yuna.none> <58c3bc0d-81bb-4cf7-8a6f-c7b70d2ffe63@proxmox.com> Content-Language: en-US From: Stefan Hanreich In-Reply-To: <58c3bc0d-81bb-4cf7-8a6f-c7b70d2ffe63@proxmox.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-SPAM-LEVEL: Spam detection results: 0 AWL 0.327 Adjusted score from AWL reputation of From: address DMARC_MISSING 0.1 Missing DMARC policy KAM_DMARC_STATUS 0.01 Test Rule for DKIM or SPF Failure with Strict Alignment (newer systems) RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED -2.3 Sender listed at https://www.dnswl.org/, medium trust SPF_HELO_NONE 0.001 SPF: HELO does not publish an SPF Record SPF_PASS -0.001 SPF: sender matches SPF record Message-ID-Hash: VQ5THZAKUQ677J4Y4H3YXLALWCHVPJTO X-Message-ID-Hash: VQ5THZAKUQ677J4Y4H3YXLALWCHVPJTO X-MailFrom: s.hanreich@proxmox.com X-Mailman-Rule-Misses: dmarc-mitigation; no-senders; approved; loop; banned-address; emergency; member-moderation; nonmember-moderation; administrivia; implicit-dest; max-recipients; max-size; news-moderation; no-subject; digests; suspicious-header X-Mailman-Version: 3.3.10 Precedence: list List-Id: Proxmox VE development discussion List-Help: List-Owner: List-Post: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: On 11/4/26 12:50 PM, Thomas Lamprecht wrote: > Am 04.11.26 um 12:34 schrieb Stefan Hanreich: >>> proxmox-firewall is built mostly around the firewall binary, and this is >>> really scoped towards just PVEs SDN, proxmox-ve-rs is probably the best >>> fit here, since proxmox mostly contains non-product-specific code > > In the mid/long-term proxmox-firewall should provide basic firewalling for > all our products, inclusive basic shared api/ui integrations. How exactly > that's structured doesn't have to be defined now, but I'd not see the whole > firewall area as PVE-only, most of its (more complex) use case might be only > sensible for PVE, but the basics should be shared. Agree, that's part of the reason why I wanted to move everything into the firewall crate at least. >> I was also thinking about ve-rs. In short/mid-term I'm not sure if we >> shouldn't just move all the firewall related parts from ve-rs to proxmox >> or proxmox-firewall completely. That'd leave us with the SDN specific >> stuff here and we could potentially turn that into a proxmox-sdn workspace? >> But I'm unsure if we want to add further crates there that deal with other, >> non-SDN stuff or where those would go then? > > proxmox workspace is fine for this here, and if not really PVE specific (on > initial introduction and somewhat foreseeable future) I'd also favor that > for new lib crates in general. > > SDN can be somewhat carved out and could be its own repo with a bunch of > crates if desired and I have nothing against that if you, Gabriel, Hannes, > ... see a strong benefit in it. In the end it still needs to produce the > librust- packaged source code crates and also those that allow PVE, PDM, > ...? usage and integration nicely, so it doesn't change much - which OTOH > is also a point for just doing it in proxmox and save a separate repo. We > can also add a sdn/ folder there to bundle the crates and keep it more > organized FWIW. Yeah, moving to to proxmox is fine by me - not sure if we even need a separate subfolder. That'd then eliminate proxmox-ve-rs completely. It'd also make building / maintaining the whole stack easier afaict?