starred/netbox
1
0
Fork 0
mirror of https://github.com/netbox-community/netbox.git synced 2026-01-11 21:10:29 +01:00
Code Issues 273 Packages Projects Releases 10 Wiki Activity

Introduction of Device Role Groups #10578

New Issue
Closed
opened 2025-12-29 21:33:20 +01:00 by adam · 3 comments
adam commented 2025-12-29 21:33:20 +01:00
Owner
Copy Link

Originally created by @jonzey0 on GitHub (Dec 17, 2024).

Originally assigned to: @arthanson on GitHub.

NetBox version

v4.1.7

Feature type

Data model extension

Triage priority

N/A

Proposed functionality

Currently all Device Roles are in a "flat" hierarchy. In order to segregate the Device Roles based on function, you may need multiple roles of a similar type if you want to segregate them accordingly.

I'm proposing that Device Role Groups be introduced to provide a level of hierarchy to Device Roles, much in a similar way to how Tenant Groups provide a similar function to how Tenants can be grouped.

Use case

In an environment where there are a lot of different device roles, it may be useful to be able to group them much like in the same way Tenants and Tenant Groups, or Contacts and Contact Groups are grouped today.

I can envisage that (for example) you may have a "Rack Infrastructure" Device Role Group which then has roles specific for "Patch Panel", "Power" etc.

Another example may be Network Switches, where you may want to segregate the Device Role based on function, while keeping them all under a Network Switch parent group.

Database changes

Not a DB expert, but I suspect it would likely require the Device Role field to be changed to accommodate this function and the introduction of a non-mandatory Device Role Group field as well.

External dependencies

No response

Originally created by @jonzey0 on GitHub (Dec 17, 2024). Originally assigned to: @arthanson on GitHub. ### NetBox version v4.1.7 ### Feature type Data model extension ### Triage priority N/A ### Proposed functionality Currently all Device Roles are in a "flat" hierarchy. In order to segregate the Device Roles based on function, you may need multiple roles of a similar type if you want to segregate them accordingly. I'm proposing that Device Role Groups be introduced to provide a level of hierarchy to Device Roles, much in a similar way to how Tenant Groups provide a similar function to how Tenants can be grouped. ### Use case In an environment where there are a lot of different device roles, it may be useful to be able to group them much like in the same way Tenants and Tenant Groups, or Contacts and Contact Groups are grouped today. I can envisage that (for example) you may have a "Rack Infrastructure" Device Role Group which then has roles specific for "Patch Panel", "Power" etc. Another example may be Network Switches, where you may want to segregate the Device Role based on function, while keeping them all under a Network Switch parent group. ### Database changes Not a DB expert, but I suspect it would likely require the Device Role field to be changed to accommodate this function and the introduction of a non-mandatory Device Role Group field as well. ### External dependencies _No response_
adam added the status: acceptedtype: featurecomplexity: medium labels 2025-12-29 21:33:20 +01:00
adam closed this issue 2025-12-29 21:33:20 +01:00
adam commented 2025-12-29 21:33:21 +01:00
Author
Owner
Copy Link

@ITJamie commented on GitHub (Dec 17, 2024):

This would be great for filtering devices down to just "networking" devices.

Would you in-visage it as group > role or could it be like locations where it could be deeply nested

Group > group > device role

It would be nice to have "networking" then "switches" as a sub group for example which then multiple roles inside switches "access switches" "management switches" etc.

@ITJamie commented on GitHub (Dec 17, 2024): This would be great for filtering devices down to just "networking" devices. Would you in-visage it as group > role or could it be like locations where it could be deeply nested Group > group > device role It would be nice to have "networking" then "switches" as a sub group for example which then multiple roles inside switches "access switches" "management switches" etc.
adam commented 2025-12-29 21:33:21 +01:00
Author
Owner
Copy Link

@jonzey0 commented on GitHub (Dec 17, 2024):

This would be great for filtering devices down to just "networking" devices.

Would you in-visage it as group > role or could it be like locations where it could be deeply nested

Group > group > device role

It would be nice to have "networking" then "switches" as a sub group for example which then multiple roles inside switches "access switches" "management switches" etc.

Yeah, the Sub-Group option is what I had in mind. Depending on the use case then the user can segregate them as they see fit in the tree structure.

Can see that being the most flexible outcome, with this all being optional anyway, much like Location Groups today are an optional field.

@jonzey0 commented on GitHub (Dec 17, 2024): > This would be great for filtering devices down to just "networking" devices. > > Would you in-visage it as group > role or could it be like locations where it could be deeply nested > > Group > group > device role > > It would be nice to have "networking" then "switches" as a sub group for example which then multiple roles inside switches "access switches" "management switches" etc. Yeah, the Sub-Group option is what I had in mind. Depending on the use case then the user can segregate them as they see fit in the tree structure. Can see that being the most flexible outcome, with this all being optional anyway, much like Location Groups today are an optional field.
adam commented 2025-12-29 21:33:21 +01:00
Author
Owner
Copy Link

@jeremystretch commented on GitHub (Feb 11, 2025):

I think this is actually a duplicate of #6290, but I'm going to keep this one instead because it has a more detailed implementation proposal.

@jeremystretch commented on GitHub (Feb 11, 2025): I think this is actually a duplicate of #6290, but I'm going to keep this one instead because it has a more detailed implementation proposal.
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 complexity: medium status: accepted type: feature
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#10578
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?