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 [212.224.123.68]) by lore.proxmox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id C825A1FF15E for <inbox@lore.proxmox.com>; Tue, 8 Apr 2025 19:08:05 +0200 (CEST) Received: from firstgate.proxmox.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by firstgate.proxmox.com (Proxmox) with ESMTP id DF5C733DD7; Tue, 8 Apr 2025 19:08:00 +0200 (CEST) Message-ID: <e7bcc506-0cf9-49e5-b3f6-4f88c1ab10cd@proxmox.com> Date: Tue, 8 Apr 2025 19:07:27 +0200 MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird To: Proxmox VE development discussion <pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com>, Stefan Hanreich <s.hanreich@proxmox.com> References: <20250408163250.355449-1-s.hanreich@proxmox.com> Content-Language: en-US From: Friedrich Weber <f.weber@proxmox.com> In-Reply-To: <20250408163250.355449-1-s.hanreich@proxmox.com> X-SPAM-LEVEL: Spam detection results: 0 AWL 0.009 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 docs/network 0/2] improve behavior of frr service when pre-installed 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> 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 08/04/2025 18:32, Stefan Hanreich wrote: > Fixes the issue of the FRR service getting started, but not enabled when > applying an SDN configuration and updates the docs to reflect the new behavior. - started with fresh ISO with sha256sum: 695c1c9b247e62d851d29d39c3e9399d3a15dd7c1bdca68b357b6bd578ee9925 - set up evpn controller and zone, clicked apply => frr.service is disabled but running - reboot => frr.service is not running - applied this patch, clicked apply => frr.service is now enabled and running - reboot => frr.service is running So this looks good to me. I was wondering whether enabling frr may have any side effects on existing setups, but since we only enable if we restart anyway, I don't think this should cause any issues. Consider this Tested-by: Friedrich Weber <f.weber@proxmox.com> _______________________________________________ pve-devel mailing list pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com https://lists.proxmox.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pve-devel