From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from gate001.proxmox.com (gate001.proxmox.com [IPv6:2a0f:8001:1:32::40]) by lore.proxmox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 10B951FF0B7 for ; Mon, 24 Aug 2026 09:28:01 +0200 (CEST) Received: from gate001.proxmox.com (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by gate001.proxmox.com (Proxmox) with ESMTP id 2E63221537; Mon, 24 Aug 2026 09:27:58 +0200 (CEST) Date: Mon, 24 Aug 2026 09:27:53 +0200 From: Hannes Laimer To: Lukas Sichert Subject: Re: [PATCH perl-rs v4 3/6] fabrics: openfabric: enable force_forwarding for ipv6 transit traffic Message-ID: References: <20260727135509.14588-1-l.sichert@proxmox.com> <20260727135509.14588-4-l.sichert@proxmox.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20260727135509.14588-4-l.sichert@proxmox.com> X-Bm-Milter-Handled: 55990f41-d878-4baa-be0a-ee34c49e34d2 X-Bm-Transport-Timestamp: 1787556444737 X-SPAM-LEVEL: Spam detection results: 0 AWL 1.154 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: ZSNPM2WCAFVPDTK7F5IAEBXIYECWYFIA X-Message-ID-Hash: ZSNPM2WCAFVPDTK7F5IAEBXIYECWYFIA X-MailFrom: h.laimer@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 CC: pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com 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 2026-07-27 15:55, Lukas Sichert wrote: > In a non-full-mesh OpenFabric setup, nodes may need to relay traffic > between peers that are not directly connected. This requires forwarding > ipv6 packets between fabric bridges. With the addition of > 'force_forwarding' to the Linux kernel, this can be done without > enabling 'all.forwarding', which disables Router Advertisements. > > Configure fabric bridges with the required 'post-up'/'post-down' > commands to enable 'force_forwarding'. > > Signed-off-by: Lukas Sichert > --- > pve-rs/src/bindings/sdn/fabrics.rs | 10 ++++++++++ > 1 file changed, 10 insertions(+) > > diff --git a/pve-rs/src/bindings/sdn/fabrics.rs b/pve-rs/src/bindings/sdn/fabrics.rs > index f96b6b1..785b537 100644 > --- a/pve-rs/src/bindings/sdn/fabrics.rs > +++ b/pve-rs/src/bindings/sdn/fabrics.rs > @@ -596,6 +596,16 @@ pub mod pve_rs_sdn_fabrics { > writeln!(interface, "\tlink-type {link_type}")?; > } > writeln!(interface, "\tip-forward 1")?; > + if cidr.is_ipv6() { > + writeln!( > + interface, > + "\tpost-up echo 1 > /proc/sys/net/ipv6/conf/{name}/force_forwarding" > + )?; this ends up on the dummy interfaces, but that never actually get traffic, this should be on the underlaying interfaces the fabric is configured on > + writeln!( > + interface, > + "\tpost-down echo 0 > /proc/sys/net/ipv6/conf/{name}/force_forwarding" > + )?; > + } > > Ok(interface) > } > -- > 2.47.3 > > > > >