Re: [PATCH docs/gui-tests/manager/network/proxmox{-ve-rs,-perl-rs} v3 00/13] Add IS-IS protocol to fabrics

[Gabriel Goller <g.goller@proxmox.com>]

On 01.09.2026 09:09, Hannes Laimer wrote:
> On 2026-08-31 14:59, Gabriel Goller wrote:
> > On 31.08.2026 14:27, Gabriel Goller wrote:
> > > On 31.08.2026 10:48, Hannes Laimer wrote:
> > > > Aside from these very tiny nits/questions, looks very good to me:
> > > >  - could we have the same `network_type`-nob here that we introduced for
> > > >    OSPF?
> > > 
> > > Yes, makes sense. ISIS supports network-type broadcast (unlike openfabric) and
> > > even multi-access (e.g. multiple devices behind a switch).
> > 
> > Oh, no wait I won't be adding this. ISIS only has broadcast and point-to-point
> > available, and the default is broadcast. We use broadcast when an interface ip
> > is set and point-to-point when no ip is set.
> > 
> 
> yes, but we only need a specified ip for v4 broadcast, v6 does not. so
> unnumbered v6 broadcast is not possible currently

Hmm that's true. v6 broadcast works in two scenarios: link-local addresses
(which IMO is not "unnumbered" -- but this is debatable :)), and because it uses
ndp instead of arp, which doesn't have the weird address-selection.

I thought a while back about this -- we don't need to duplicate the ipv6
addresses to the interface. But then we should also remove the link-local
addresses to make it clean.

> the ip for the nic is taken from the node config, so leaving the nic ip
> fields empty doesn't necesarrily mean do p2p, p2p still needs a
> next-htop target and for v4 this has to be specified. we just take the
> ip from the node, which is fine. but leaving the ip field empty does not
> imply do `p2p`, just: use the node-ip for either(p2p or broadcast).
> 
> for v6 we could actually never copy the node-ip to the nic(we do that
> now always), this would allow configuring unnumbered v6 broadcast or
> p2p, which are both possible with v6. 
> 
> does isisd support v4-via-v6 routes? if it does we could just do v6
> unnumbered in case no nic ip is specified and skip configuring the nic
> ourself..

Nope.

> either way, I still think the nob makes sense here, cause the the
> existance of a specified ip on the nic doesn't really point either way
> (bc or p2p), both need one, and for v6 can work without one

Hmm yes you're right. We could add a knob like with ospf, where we have "auto"
(the current heuristic to select network-type) and then "point-to-point" and
"broadcast".

> > > >  - the warning in the UI could be warpped in a `gettext()`
> > > 
> > > Agree.
> > > 
> > > >  - could we put `isisd => 1` behind an IS-IS fabric presence check? i
> > > >    guess that could break setups that have it enabled manually though..
> > > 
> > > Hmm you're right I missed this. I somehow thought we always have it enabled like
> > > bgpd, but turns out the user needs to manually enable it.
> > > 
> > > [snip]