I'm unsure here. But I have two suggestions:
I sent you a message on Slack, as a person with >10 Pull Requests, for us you are contributor and as such eligible for LTS images access.
I get it, not a bug then. Sad, but very understandable.
@alainlamar what's the preferred CLI command?
I finally managed to narrow this down further. This problem is caused by enabling the extended nexthop capability. FRR intentionally sends RAs when this capability is enabled, althought so far I don't understand why. I opened a discussion in the FRR repo: https://github.com/FRRouting/frr/discussions/15994
This would be a great feature to have. I ran into this the other day and found out via slack single-quotes works, but only for a one-liner. ex. set route-target vpn import '65000:1 65000:2'.
This will be possible after subtask T6006, for 1.5; backport can be considered at that time, but for now limit tags to Circinus.
Just so I dont get the vocabulary wrong here...
Ill put it into "known issue" since IMHO a complete "resolved" would be when this feature exists in config-mode aswell.
Feel free to reopen it and update the task description, but I'm not expecting it to be implemented.
The thing is that adding this as op-mode only doesnt really solve anything.
I think the original request was Add ability to resequence rule numbers for firewall, and we added this tool.
Auto-Apply configuration based on this tool is the wrong way. We haven't had such hacks before and probably won't implement them in the nearest feature.
All configuration changes have to be only per user commit; there should not be any auto-commits/auto applies configs. We have API for these tricks.
CLI is completely different from the cisco/arista logic.
Also NAT-rules are in the need of a resequence feature in the config-mode:
I'm closing this task a solution was included. I'm not in favor of introducing similar command in configuration mode.
Maybe we should change firewall priority, and make sure all interfaces are defined in the system before loading firewall?