This message was deleted.

ip route shows this:

default via 192.168.3.1 dev eno1np0 proto static metric 100
10.42.0.4 dev cali6446c8c3a12 scope link
10.42.0.5 dev cali0c6c7654487 scope link
10.42.0.9 dev cali9f9a5f6d18f scope link
10.42.0.11 dev calibfee1498090 scope link
10.42.0.12 dev calia22f1d559ef scope link
10.42.0.14 dev caliaaabe2e96c6 scope link
10.42.0.16 dev calib22c9e7b454 scope link
10.42.1.0/24 via 10.42.1.0 dev flannel.1 onlink
10.42.3.0/24 via 10.42.3.0 dev flannel.1 onlink
192.168.3.0/24 dev eno1np0 proto kernel scope link src 192.168.3.21 metric 100
192.168.3.0/24 dev enp197s0f0 proto kernel scope link src 192.168.3.41 metric 101
192.168.3.0/24 dev enp197s0f1 proto kernel scope link src 192.168.3.51 metric 102
192.168.3.0/24 dev enp1s0f0 proto kernel scope link src 192.168.3.61 metric 103
192.168.3.0/24 dev enp1s0f1 proto kernel scope link src 192.168.3.71 metric 104

This reddit thread seems to indicate that the order of operations may have played a role/factor in the configuration update success https://www.reddit.com/r/rancher/comments/1dev6a7/rke2_using_2nd_nic_address/ Your question made me curious and I thought you might need multus - still not sure though.