Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Interfaces - Multi-Personality/Shared Interface #16057

Closed
retrogamer999 opened this issue May 9, 2024 · 4 comments
Closed

Interfaces - Multi-Personality/Shared Interface #16057

retrogamer999 opened this issue May 9, 2024 · 4 comments
Labels
status: revisions needed This issue requires additional information to be actionable type: feature Introduction of new functionality to the application

Comments

@retrogamer999
Copy link

NetBox version

v4.0.0

Feature type

New functionality

Proposed functionality

Going through the list of interfaces that are available there is no reference for interfaces that have multiple personalities i.e. Port 17-20 on a FortiGate 100F has SFP or Copper compatibility

Use case

More accurate documentation

Database changes

unknown

External dependencies

unknown

@retrogamer999 retrogamer999 added status: needs triage This issue is awaiting triage by a maintainer type: feature Introduction of new functionality to the application labels May 9, 2024
@jeremystretch
Copy link
Member

Thank you for your interest in extending NetBox. Unfortunately, the information you have provided does not constitute an actionable feature request. Per our contributing guide, a feature request must include a thorough description of the proposed functionality, including any database changes, new views or API endpoints, and so on. It must also include a detailed use case justifying its implementation. If you would like to elaborate on your proposal, please modify your post above. If sufficient detail is not added, this issue will be closed.

@jeremystretch jeremystretch removed their assignment May 9, 2024
@jeremystretch jeremystretch added status: revisions needed This issue requires additional information to be actionable and removed status: needs triage This issue is awaiting triage by a maintainer labels May 9, 2024
@jeremystretch jeremystretch self-assigned this May 9, 2024
@a084ed22
Copy link

a084ed22 commented May 9, 2024

dual-personality interfaces have been a topic discussed before. As far as I remember, the solutions offered were to either manually change the interface type depending on your needs, or to populate both i.e. in device templates, and let people pick the correct one as needed, differentiating between them with a suffix.

@sleepinggenius2
Copy link
Contributor

We've been experimenting with modeling dual-mode ports like this (1/1/1 in this example):

Logical:

  • 1/1/1 - Type Bridge

Physical:

  • 1/1/1|Copper - Type 1000BASE-T (1GE), Bridged interface 1/1/1
  • 1/1/1|SFP - Type SFP (1GE), Bridged interface 1/1/1

@jeremystretch
Copy link
Member

This issue is being closed as no further information has been provided. If you would like to revisit this topic, please first modify your original post to include all the requested detail, and then ask that the issue be reopened.

@jeremystretch jeremystretch closed this as not planned Won't fix, can't repro, duplicate, stale May 17, 2024
@jeremystretch jeremystretch removed their assignment May 17, 2024
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
status: revisions needed This issue requires additional information to be actionable type: feature Introduction of new functionality to the application
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

4 participants