Note: This bug is displayed in read-only format because
the product is no longer active in Red Hat Bugzilla.
RHEL Engineering is moving the tracking of its product development work on RHEL 6 through RHEL 9 to Red Hat Jira (issues.redhat.com). If you're a Red Hat customer, please continue to file support cases via the Red Hat customer portal. If you're not, please head to the "RHEL project" in Red Hat Jira and file new tickets here. Individual Bugzilla bugs in the statuses "NEW", "ASSIGNED", and "POST" are being migrated throughout September 2023. Bugs of Red Hat partners with an assigned Engineering Partner Manager (EPM) are migrated in late September as per pre-agreed dates. Bugs against components "kernel", "kernel-rt", and "kpatch" are only migrated if still in "NEW" or "ASSIGNED". If you cannot log in to RH Jira, please consult article #7032570. That failing, please send an e-mail to the RH Jira admins at rh-issues@redhat.com to troubleshoot your issue as a user management inquiry. The email creates a ServiceNow ticket with Red Hat. Individual Bugzilla bugs that are migrated will be moved to status "CLOSED", resolution "MIGRATED", and set with "MigratedToJIRA" in "Keywords". The link to the successor Jira issue will be found under "Links", have a little "two-footprint" icon next to it, and direct you to the "RHEL project" in Red Hat Jira (issue links are of type "https://issues.redhat.com/browse/RHEL-XXXX", where "X" is a digit). This same link will be available in a blue banner at the top of the page informing you that that bug has been migrated.
Description of problem:
NM provides connection option called ipv4.route-table and ipv6.route-table which decides in which table the route will configured. Provide config option in schema to configure this parameter.
Something like:
- name: veth1
type: ethernet
state: up
ipv4:
dhcp: true
enabled: true
table-id: 500
ipv6:
autoconf: true
dhcp: true
enabled: true
table-id: 500
Hi Ales,
For defining route table in static route, you may use:
```yml
routes:
config:
- destination: 198.51.100.0/24
metric: 150
next-hop-address: 192.0.2.1
next-hop-interface: eth1
table-id: 254
```
The ipv4.route-table and ipv6.route-table is for routes learn from DHCP/Autconf.
Can you give me a use case why storing those dynamic routes in route table matters?
Hi Gris,
the answer is simple, dynamic source routing. Now we have learn gateway from DHCP/Autoconf response and then configure it to routing table. With this we would require only to set the rules to use this table. As a bonus this approach does not require to check DHCP responses and search for gateways.
Since the problem described in this bug report should be
resolved in a recent advisory, it has been closed with a
resolution of ERRATA.
For information on the advisory (nmstate bug fix and enhancement update), and where to find the updated
files, follow the link below.
If the solution does not work for you, open a new bug report.
https://access.redhat.com/errata/RHBA-2021:1748
Description of problem: NM provides connection option called ipv4.route-table and ipv6.route-table which decides in which table the route will configured. Provide config option in schema to configure this parameter. Something like: - name: veth1 type: ethernet state: up ipv4: dhcp: true enabled: true table-id: 500 ipv6: autoconf: true dhcp: true enabled: true table-id: 500