starred/netbox
1
0
Fork 0
mirror of https://github.com/netbox-community/netbox.git synced 2026-01-12 05:20:31 +01:00
Code Issues 273 Packages Projects Releases 10 Wiki Activity

Custom fields for interfaces #1016

New Issue
Closed
opened 2025-12-29 16:27:55 +01:00 by adam · 10 comments
adam commented 2025-12-29 16:27:55 +01:00
Owner
Copy Link

Originally created by @jeanders on GitHub (Jun 9, 2017).

Issue type: Feature request

It would be very handy to have the ability to configure custom fields on interfaces as well. I am currently looking to store information such as if it is access or trunk, workstation or printer, etc.

Originally created by @jeanders on GitHub (Jun 9, 2017). <!-- Please note: GitHub issues are to be used only for feature requests and bug reports. For installation assistance or general discussion, please join us on the mailing list: https://groups.google.com/forum/#!forum/netbox-discuss Please indicate "bug report" or "feature request" below. Be sure to search the existing set of issues (both open and closed) to see if a similar issue has already been raised. --> ### Issue type: Feature request It would be very handy to have the ability to configure custom fields on interfaces as well. I am currently looking to store information such as if it is access or trunk, workstation or printer, etc.
adam closed this issue 2025-12-29 16:27:55 +01:00
adam commented 2025-12-29 16:27:56 +01:00
Author
Owner
Copy Link

@jeremystretch commented on GitHub (Jun 9, 2017):

This has come up before, and it's been decided not to extend custom fields to interfaces. #150 will address VLAN assignment, and descriptions can be used to indicate the type of connected device (in lieu of creating a discrete connection).

@jeremystretch commented on GitHub (Jun 9, 2017): This has come up before, and it's been decided not to extend custom fields to interfaces. #150 will address VLAN assignment, and descriptions can be used to indicate the type of connected device (in lieu of creating a discrete connection).
adam commented 2025-12-29 16:27:56 +01:00
Author
Owner
Copy Link

@taktv6 commented on GitHub (Apr 7, 2018):

Seriously? Not supporting custom fields for interfaces unnecessarily limits the possibility to use netbox for automation purpose. Please fix.

@taktv6 commented on GitHub (Apr 7, 2018): Seriously? Not supporting custom fields for interfaces unnecessarily limits the possibility to use netbox for automation purpose. Please fix.
adam commented 2025-12-29 16:27:56 +01:00
Author
Owner
Copy Link

@hypokondrickard commented on GitHub (Apr 18, 2018):

it would be super useful here aswell. I'm building a services database where netbox is involved as a backend component. Because there is no way of "tagging" an interface with a service identifier and filter based on that via the API, I have to use a separate database to track what interfaces has been assigned the different services.

If it's been decided that custom fields on interfaces wont benefit mankind, could we still maybe make the /dcim/interfaces endpoint support filtering based on interface description?

Thanks a lot

@hypokondrickard commented on GitHub (Apr 18, 2018): it would be super useful here aswell. I'm building a services database where netbox is involved as a backend component. Because there is no way of "tagging" an interface with a service identifier and filter based on that via the API, I have to use a separate database to track what interfaces has been assigned the different services. If it's been decided that custom fields on interfaces wont benefit mankind, could we still maybe make the /dcim/interfaces endpoint support filtering based on interface description? Thanks a lot
adam commented 2025-12-29 16:27:57 +01:00
Author
Owner
Copy Link

@einstux commented on GitHub (Jun 5, 2018):

Hey @jeremystretch,

We have seen here 15 likes and 6 hearts for getting this feature -
I understand if you don't have the ressources and time to implement this,
but would you be willing to accept a patch for this?

If so, we would be willing to sponsor a patch in the near future.

Thanks,
Tom

@einstux commented on GitHub (Jun 5, 2018): Hey @jeremystretch, We have seen here 15 likes and 6 hearts for getting this feature - I understand if you don't have the ressources and time to implement this, but would you be willing to accept a patch for this? If so, we would be willing to sponsor a patch in the near future. Thanks, Tom
adam commented 2025-12-29 16:27:57 +01:00
Author
Owner
Copy Link

@jord-bh commented on GitHub (Jun 29, 2018):

@sirtux @jeremystretch I would love to see this happen, it would open up a lot of automation capabilities revolving around interfaces. If I can be of any assistance be it testing or developing, I am also willing to put in some effort on this.

@jord-bh commented on GitHub (Jun 29, 2018): @sirtux @jeremystretch I would love to see this happen, it would open up a lot of automation capabilities revolving around interfaces. If I can be of any assistance be it testing or developing, I am also willing to put in some effort on this.
adam commented 2025-12-29 16:27:57 +01:00
Author
Owner
Copy Link

@reening commented on GitHub (Jul 12, 2018):

Another +1 for this, for example I'd love to have the ability to add a custom boolean field to an interface for a DHCP client. Other use cases could be interface/encapsulation types or tunnel endpoints. I don't like filtering based on names and using the global config context, since these parameters are specific to the interface. It is currently limiting in writing full automation using Netbox.

I'd also be happy to spend some hours implementing this if it will be accepted. It seems that there is quite some demand for a feature like this.

@reening commented on GitHub (Jul 12, 2018): Another +1 for this, for example I'd love to have the ability to add a custom boolean field to an interface for a DHCP client. Other use cases could be interface/encapsulation types or tunnel endpoints. I don't like filtering based on names and using the global config context, since these parameters are specific to the interface. It is currently limiting in writing full automation using Netbox. I'd also be happy to spend some hours implementing this if it will be accepted. It seems that there is quite some demand for a feature like this.
adam commented 2025-12-29 16:27:57 +01:00
Author
Owner
Copy Link

@einstux commented on GitHub (Jul 12, 2018):

We are working on this right now, and probably create a pull request and see if this is accepted, since the maintainers don't comment here right now. Stay tuned.

@einstux commented on GitHub (Jul 12, 2018): We are working on this right now, and probably create a pull request and see if this is accepted, since the maintainers don't comment here right now. Stay tuned.
adam commented 2025-12-29 16:27:58 +01:00
Author
Owner
Copy Link

@aakso commented on GitHub (Jul 31, 2018):

I think custom fields are vital for the usability of any configuration database. I'm planning of generating the base configuration based on the device interfaces at the same time assigning link networks and such thru the IPAM.

@aakso commented on GitHub (Jul 31, 2018): I think custom fields are vital for the usability of any configuration database. I'm planning of generating the base configuration based on the device interfaces at the same time assigning link networks and such thru the IPAM.
adam commented 2025-12-29 16:27:58 +01:00
Author
Owner
Copy Link

@hypokondrickard commented on GitHub (Aug 2, 2018):

Everyone, seems Mr Stretch has closed a feature request #2281 as beeing a duplicate to this one.

Fingers crossed this one is about to be re-opened.

@hypokondrickard commented on GitHub (Aug 2, 2018): Everyone, seems Mr Stretch has closed a feature request #2281 as beeing a duplicate to this one. Fingers crossed this one is about to be re-opened.
adam commented 2025-12-29 16:27:58 +01:00
Author
Owner
Copy Link

@jeremystretch commented on GitHub (Aug 2, 2018):

This issue has been discussed and closed. Locking this thread.

@jeremystretch commented on GitHub (Aug 2, 2018): This issue has been discussed and closed. Locking this thread.
Sign in to join this conversation.
No Branch/Tag Specified
Branches Tags
Labels
Clear labels
beta
breaking change
complexity: high
complexity: low
complexity: medium
needs milestone
netbox
pending closure
plugin candidate
pull-request
Mirrored from GitHub Pull Request
 severity: high
severity: low
severity: medium
status: accepted
status: backlog
status: blocked
status: duplicate
status: needs owner
status: needs triage
status: revisions needed
status: under review
topic: GraphQL
topic: Internationalization
topic: OpenAPI
topic: UI/UX
topic: cabling
topic: event rules
topic: htmx navigation
topic: industrialization
topic: migrations
topic: plugins
topic: scripts
topic: templating
topic: testing
type: bug
type: deprecation
type: documentation
type: feature
type: housekeeping
type: translation
No Label
Milestone
No items
No Milestone
Projects
Clear projects
No project
Assignees
Clear assignees
adam
No Assignees
1 Participants
Notifications
Due Date
No due date set.
Dependencies

No dependencies set.

Reference: starred/netbox#1016
Delete Branch "%!s()"

Deleting a branch is permanent. Although the deleted branch may continue to exist for a short time before it actually gets removed, it CANNOT be undone in most cases. Continue?