From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <s.hanreich@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 BA4419AAE9
 for <pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com>; Fri, 17 Nov 2023 17:07:09 +0100 (CET)
Received: from firstgate.proxmox.com (localhost [127.0.0.1])
 by firstgate.proxmox.com (Proxmox) with ESMTP id A38D736992
 for <pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com>; Fri, 17 Nov 2023 17:07:09 +0100 (CET)
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>; Fri, 17 Nov 2023 17:07:09 +0100 (CET)
Received: from proxmox-new.maurer-it.com (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1])
 by proxmox-new.maurer-it.com (Proxmox) with ESMTP id DF27443ED8
 for <pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com>; Fri, 17 Nov 2023 17:07:08 +0100 (CET)
Message-ID: <ce5f0c19-cdc1-5a7b-7584-10b380fd49b3@proxmox.com>
Date: Fri, 17 Nov 2023 17:07:08 +0100
MIME-Version: 1.0
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:102.0) Gecko/20100101
 Thunderbird/102.15.0
Content-Language: en-US
To: pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com
References: <20231117114011.834002-1-s.hanreich@proxmox.com>
 <a0354bc8ad0c119bbd4386ff38fc10a596963818.camel@groupe-cyllene.com>
 <e8ee45f0-62e5-4210-1fdb-ee3b076693c3@proxmox.com>
From: Stefan Hanreich <s.hanreich@proxmox.com>
In-Reply-To: <e8ee45f0-62e5-4210-1fdb-ee3b076693c3@proxmox.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-SPAM-LEVEL: Spam detection results:  0
 AWL 2.068 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           -3.265 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] [PATCH v4
 cluster/network/manager/qemu-server/container/docs 00/33] Add support for
 DHCP servers to SDN
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: Fri, 17 Nov 2023 16:07:09 -0000

On 11/17/23 17:05, Stefan Hanreich wrote:
> Maybe the issue here are the respective fwbr interfaces inbetween?

I guess that's unlikely since that would affect VMs as well I suppose....