From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from firstgate.proxmox.com (firstgate.proxmox.com [IPv6:2a01:7e0:0:424::9]) by lore.proxmox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id B45221FF13B for ; Wed, 25 Mar 2026 16:02:46 +0100 (CET) Received: from firstgate.proxmox.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by firstgate.proxmox.com (Proxmox) with ESMTP id F3FEF1DDBF; Wed, 25 Mar 2026 16:03:05 +0100 (CET) Date: Wed, 25 Mar 2026 16:03:00 +0100 From: Gabriel Goller To: Stefan Hanreich Subject: Re: [PATCH proxmox-ve-rs 8/9] ve-config: frr: implement frr config generation for route maps Message-ID: Mail-Followup-To: Stefan Hanreich , pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com References: <20260325094142.174364-1-s.hanreich@proxmox.com> <20260325094142.174364-11-s.hanreich@proxmox.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20260325094142.174364-11-s.hanreich@proxmox.com> User-Agent: NeoMutt/20241002-35-39f9a6 X-Bm-Milter-Handled: 55990f41-d878-4baa-be0a-ee34c49e34d2 X-Bm-Transport-Timestamp: 1774450933413 X-SPAM-LEVEL: Spam detection results: 0 AWL 0.023 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 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: JVBWO6LDVF7FUIGIDHU654UNMSW6M7BU X-Message-ID-Hash: JVBWO6LDVF7FUIGIDHU654UNMSW6M7BU X-MailFrom: g.goller@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 25.03.2026 10:41, Stefan Hanreich wrote: > Implements conversion traits for all the section config types, so they > can be converted into their respective FRR template counterpart. > > This module contains a helper for adding all route map entries to an > existing FRR configuration. It will overwrite existing route map > entries that have the same name AND order number. But if entries with > the same name, but different ordering, exist they will only be added > to the existing FRR configuration without dropping the other route map > entries. > This currently not relevant either way, because the initial API > implementation will reject creating route maps with names of route > maps that the stack auto-generates. In the future this behavior can > be used for selectively overriding / appending existing Proxmox VE > route maps. > > The helper also automatically orders route map entries according to > their ordering number. This allows for deterministic FRR configuration > output, which is important for tests and convenient for human > readability. > > Signed-off-by: Stefan Hanreich > --- > proxmox-ve-config/src/sdn/route_map.rs | 271 +++++++++++++++++++++++++ > 1 file changed, 271 insertions(+) > > diff --git a/proxmox-ve-config/src/sdn/route_map.rs b/proxmox-ve-config/src/sdn/route_map.rs > index 3f4da56..8d8c4dc 100644 > --- a/proxmox-ve-config/src/sdn/route_map.rs > +++ b/proxmox-ve-config/src/sdn/route_map.rs [snip] > + impl Into for MatchAction { > + fn into(self) -> RouteMapMatch { > + match self { > + Self::RouteType(evpn_route_type) => RouteMapMatch::RouteType(evpn_route_type), > + Self::Vni(vni) => RouteMapMatch::Vni(vni), > + Self::IpAddressPrefixList(prefix_list_name) => { > + RouteMapMatch::IpAddressPrefixList(prefix_list_name.into()) > + } > + Self::Ip6AddressPrefixList(prefix_list_name) => { > + RouteMapMatch::Ip6AddressPrefixList(prefix_list_name.into()) > + } > + Self::IpNextHopPrefixList(prefix_list_name) => { > + RouteMapMatch::IpNextHopPrefixList(prefix_list_name.into()) > + } > + Self::Ip6NextHopPrefixList(prefix_list_name) => { > + RouteMapMatch::Ip6NextHopPrefixList(prefix_list_name.into()) > + } > + Self::IpNextHopAddress(ipv4_addr) => RouteMapMatch::IpNextHopAddress(*ipv4_addr), > + Self::Ip6NextHopAddress(ipv6_addr) => RouteMapMatch::Ip6NextHopAddress(*ipv6_addr), > + Self::Metric(metric) => RouteMapMatch::Metric(metric), > + Self::LocalPreference(local_preference) => { > + RouteMapMatch::LocalPreference(local_preference) > + } > + Self::Peer(ip_addr) => RouteMapMatch::Peer(ip_addr), > + Self::Tag(tag) => RouteMapMatch::Tag(tag), > + } > + } > + } > + > + impl Into for SetAction { > + fn into(self) -> RouteMapSet { > + match self { > + Self::IpNextHopPeerAddress => RouteMapSet::IpNextHopPeerAddress, > + Self::IpNextHopUnchanged => RouteMapSet::IpNextHopUnchanged, > + Self::IpNextHop(ipv4_addr) => RouteMapSet::IpNextHop(*ipv4_addr), > + Self::Ip6NextHopPeerAddress => RouteMapSet::Ip6NextHopPeerAddress, > + Self::Ip6NextHopPreferGlobal => RouteMapSet::Ip6NextHopPreferGlobal, > + Self::Ip6NextHop(ipv6_addr) => RouteMapSet::Ip6NextHop(*ipv6_addr), > + Self::LocalPreference(local_preference) => { > + RouteMapSet::LocalPreference(local_preference) > + } > + Self::Tag(tag) => RouteMapSet::Tag(tag), > + Self::Weight(weight) => RouteMapSet::Weight(weight), > + Self::Metric(metric) => RouteMapSet::Metric(metric), > + Self::Src(src) => RouteMapSet::Src(src), > + } > + } > + } > + > + impl Into for RouteMapEntry { > + fn into(self) -> FrrRouteMap { > + FrrRouteMap { > + seq: self.id.order, > + action: match self.action { > + RouteMapAction::Permit => proxmox_frr::ser::route_map::AccessAction::Permit, > + RouteMapAction::Deny => proxmox_frr::ser::route_map::AccessAction::Deny, > + }, > + matches: self > + .match_actions > + .into_iter() > + .map(|match_action| match_action.into_inner().into()) > + .collect(), > + sets: self > + .set_actions > + .into_iter() > + .map(|set_action| set_action.into_inner().into()) > + .collect(), > + custom_frr_config: Default::default(), > + } > + } > + } These impls above could be From<>, even though we never need the other direction :) clippy otherwise complains. > + > + /// Add a list of Route Map Entries to a [`FrrConfig`]. > + /// > + /// This method takes a list of Route Map Entries and adds them to given FRR configuration. > + /// Existing Route Map entries with the same name, but different ordering number will remain in > + /// the configuration. Entries with the same ordering will get merged. > + /// > + /// This behavior is different from Prefix Lists, where we overwrite existing Prefix Lists in > + /// the FRR configuration. The reason for this is that users can override the Route Map setting > + /// in the EVPN controller. > + pub fn build_frr_route_maps( > + config: impl IntoIterator, > + frr_config: &mut FrrConfig, > + ) -> Result<(), anyhow::Error> { > + for route_map in config.into_iter() { > + let RouteMap::RouteMapEntry(route_map) = route_map; > + let route_map_name = RouteMapName::new(route_map.id.route_map_id.to_string()); > + > + if let Some(frr_route_map) = frr_config.routemaps.get_mut(&route_map_name) { > + let idx = > + frr_route_map.partition_point(|element| element.seq <= route_map.id().order()); > + frr_route_map.insert(idx, route_map.into()); > + } else { > + frr_config > + .routemaps > + .insert(route_map_name, vec![route_map.into()]); > + } > + } > + > + Ok(()) > + } > + > [snip]