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.

+++ This bug was initially created as a clone of Bug #2166630 +++

Description of problem:

When using a vrf, a rule like 

1000:   from all lookup [l3mdev-table]

is created, so it's common practice to change the priority of the rule associated with the "local" table to a higher value.
The issue is that it's not currently possible with nmstate.

A desired state of 

route-rules:
  config:
    - route-table: 255
      priority: 0
      family: ipv4
      state: absent
    - route-table: 255
      priority: 32765
      family: ipv4

Will result in an error.

Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable):


How reproducible:

Always

Steps to Reproduce:
1. Apply the configuration above
2.
3.

Actual results:

The configuration is refused

Expected results:

The priority of the rule related to the "local" route table changes.

Additional info:

--- Additional comment from Gris Ge on 2023-02-07 15:16:28 UTC ---

The use case is describe at https://www.dasblinkenlichten.com/working-with-linux-vrfs/

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 (NetworkManager 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-2023:2485