PR:
https://github.com/vyos/vyos-1x/pull/2026

PR for vyos-1x https://github.com/vyos/vyos-1x/pull/2025

Maybe related with https://vyos.dev/T5048

PR https://github.com/vyos/vyos-build/pull/355

Draft PR re-opened following fix of regression with option 'recursive'; simplified logic and added optional args to get_config_defaults to mirror get_config_dict. The latter allows easy manipulation of defaults in cases where the automatic merge is not sufficient.

There are no network or broadcast addresses in v6 like there are in v4. The first address (ex: 2a10:ffff:ffff::/64) is the Anycast address for "All Routers" on a subnet in v6 land.

Well, in an example like yours, using the network address as an IP is not really best practice even tho its works.
So, the validator forces the users to do it the right way, which is probably a good thing.

Validator doesn't allow setting network address to the interface
the same way you can't add 10.2.3.0/24 to interface
But natively it seems working

vyos@r14# sudo ip a add 10.5.0.0/24 dev eth0
[edit]
vyos@r14# ping 10.5.0.0
PING 10.5.0.0 (10.5.0.0) 56(84) bytes of data.
64 bytes from 10.5.0.0: icmp_seq=1 ttl=64 time=0.062 ms
^C

This did solve it. I did not search thoroughly enough it seems.

this issues was resolved on https://vyos.dev/T5127. It happens when FRR tries to calculate the auto-rd per vrf . it can be solved by using router-id on each vrf or interface dummy in the VRFs ,

Chiming in here as a 'me too', on vyos-1.4-rolling-202305300317

PR's:
https://github.com/vyos/libvyosconfig/pull/11 (merged)
https://github.com/vyos/vyos-1x/pull/2023

I checked 6 routers, 2 showed the issue. No idea what the impact is. All of them running 1.3.2.

Maybe this [a-zA-Z_](?:[a-zA-Z0-9_\-\.]{0,}[a-zA-Z0-9_\-])?

I have the correct host-name after reboot

vyos@r14:~$ 
vyos@r14:~$ vtysh -c "show run" | match host
hostname r14
vyos@r14:~$ 
vyos@r14:~$ 
vyos@r14:~$ show ver
Version:          VyOS 1.4-rolling-202305260317
Release train:    current

Draft PR https://github.com/vyos/vyos-1x/pull/2020
Another solution https://github.com/sever-sever/vyos-1x/commit/6f0dadef7ffa64472a98d8614a69538230b2b10d#diff-a4d8965b41a529a70fe69baf25f8413122f3b686ce0b9fe5f9033b4792f4d475
PR https://github.com/vyos/vyos-1x/pull/2022

@zsdc I built the image now, and it works as expected. The issue looks resolved. Thank you.

@dutty can you try to build an image again and check now?

PR https://github.com/vyos/vyos-1x/pull/2021

PR for VyOS 1.3 LTS branch https://github.com/vyos/vyos-1x/pull/2019

Yes, T4737 looks the same.

In T5243#149267, @Viacheslav wrote:

Maybe the related bug described in T4737
Could you show a version of FRR?

show version all | match frr

Maybe the related bug described in T4737
Could you show a version of FRR?

show version all | match frr

In T970#149229, @olivier.hault wrote:

How far are we in the testing of this important feature ?

Added extension and example for test_vif_8021q_mtu_limits.

One fix added; I'm looking at an extension for the case of test_vif_8021q_mtu_limits, as mentioned in the comment in base_interfaces_test.py.