[GH-ISSUE #214] Improve Cloud-Init ipconfig[n] #44

New issue

Closed

opened 2026-02-28 00:40:19 +03:00 by kerem · 3 comments

kerem commented

2026-02-28 00:40:19 +03:00

Owner

Originally created by @sebastian-de on GitHub (Nov 3, 2022).
Original GitHub issue: https://github.com/Telmate/proxmox-api-go/issues/214

While working with packer-plugin-proxmox, which also uses this project, I had a look at how ipconfig-entries for Cloud-Init are handled.
The way it works right now makes it quite clumsy to add the relevant support to Packer.

Right now a config block looks like this:

{
  "network": {
    "0": {
      "model": "virtio",
      "bridge": "vmbr0",
    }
  }
  "ipconfig0": "gw=10.0.2.2,ip=10.0.2.17/24"
}

I would like to define the ipconfig inside every network card block like this:

{
  "network": {
    "0": {
      "model": "virtio",
      "bridge": "vmbr0",
      "ipconfig": "gw=10.0.2.2,ip=10.0.2.17/24"
    }
  }
}

I know that this is a breaking change, but I think this makes the configuration (and code) a lot cleaner.
I'm making a PR ready, please let me know what you think!

Originally created by @sebastian-de on GitHub (Nov 3, 2022). Original GitHub issue: https://github.com/Telmate/proxmox-api-go/issues/214 While working with [packer-plugin-proxmox](https://github.com/hashicorp/packer-plugin-proxmox/), which also uses this project, I had a look at how ipconfig-entries for Cloud-Init are handled. The way it works right now makes it quite clumsy to add the relevant support to Packer. Right now a config block looks like this: ```json { "network": { "0": { "model": "virtio", "bridge": "vmbr0", } } "ipconfig0": "gw=10.0.2.2,ip=10.0.2.17/24" } ``` I would like to define the `ipconfig` inside every network card block like this: ```json { "network": { "0": { "model": "virtio", "bridge": "vmbr0", "ipconfig": "gw=10.0.2.2,ip=10.0.2.17/24" } } } ``` I know that this is a breaking change, but I think this makes the configuration (and code) a lot cleaner. I'm making a PR ready, please let me know what you think!

kerem closed this issue

2026-02-28 00:40:19 +03:00

kerem commented

2026-02-28 00:40:20 +03:00

Author

Owner

@mleone87 commented on GitHub (Nov 4, 2022):

Hello @sebastian-de and thanks for your work!
To be honest, I would love to stick to the API structure made by proxmox, this is only a wrapper for the api and the net[n] api object has no ipiconfig[n] in it. In fact, one can create a network without cloud init support(I know, we can always omit it the json)

In this api there is a notable -broken- exception for the disk where the sata/virtio/scsi[n] and that should be fixed too

I see no problem in making ipiconfig0-15 objects a more concise structure

{
  "ipconfig": {
    "0": {
      "ip": "192.168.1.1"
    }
  }
}

@mleone87 commented on GitHub (Nov 4, 2022): Hello @sebastian-de and thanks for your work! To be honest, I would love to stick to the API structure made by proxmox, this is only a wrapper for the api and the net[n] api object has no ipiconfig[n] in it. In fact, one can create a network without cloud init support(I know, we can always omit it the json) In this api there is a notable -broken- exception for the disk where the sata/virtio/scsi[n] and that should be fixed too I see no problem in making ipiconfig0-15 objects a more concise structure ```json { "ipconfig": { "0": { "ip": "192.168.1.1" } } } ```

kerem commented

2026-02-28 00:40:20 +03:00

Author

Owner

@sebastian-de commented on GitHub (Nov 4, 2022):

Hey @mleone87 , thank you for your feedback!

Hello @sebastian-de and thanks for your work! To be honest, I would love to stick to the API structure made by proxmox, this is only a wrapper for the api and the net[n] api object has no ipiconfig[n] in it.

I guess you're right in sticking to to Proxmox API as close as possible. Since ipconfig[n] and net[n] are mapped on the Proxmox side, I thought it made sense to declare them together. But thinking about it again, it makes more sense to separate Qemu and Cloud-Init options.

Since I don't think that it's worth the hassle to split the ipconfig-strings themselves, what do you think about just doing this:

{
  "ipconfig": {
    "0": "gw=10.0.2.2,ip=10.0.2.17/24",
    "1": "gw=10.0.3.1,ip=10.0.3.20/24"
  }
}

~~This could be implemented without breaking the API (I think),~~ but we would still get rid of the sixteen hardcoded ipconfig entries.
If desired, the ipconfig strings could be split in a second step.

@sebastian-de commented on GitHub (Nov 4, 2022): Hey @mleone87 , thank you for your feedback! > Hello @sebastian-de and thanks for your work! To be honest, I would love to stick to the API structure made by proxmox, this is only a wrapper for the api and the net[n] api object has no ipiconfig[n] in it. I guess you're right in sticking to to Proxmox API as close as possible. Since ipconfig[n] and net[n] are mapped on the Proxmox side, I thought it made sense to declare them together. But thinking about it again, it makes more sense to separate Qemu and Cloud-Init options. Since I don't think that it's worth the hassle to split the ipconfig-strings themselves, what do you think about just doing this: ```json { "ipconfig": { "0": "gw=10.0.2.2,ip=10.0.2.17/24", "1": "gw=10.0.3.1,ip=10.0.3.20/24" } } ``` ~~This could be implemented without breaking the API (I think),~~ but we would still get rid of the sixteen hardcoded ipconfig entries. If desired, the ipconfig strings could be split in a second step.

kerem commented

2026-02-28 00:40:20 +03:00

Author

Owner

@mleone87 commented on GitHub (Dec 1, 2022):

We can close I guess, merged!

@mleone87 commented on GitHub (Dec 1, 2022): We can close I guess, merged!

kerem referenced this issue

2026-02-28 00:40:59 +03:00

[PR #44] [MERGED] Add SCSI controller model to the API #180