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

Changing scope of VLAN group breaks possible VLAN association #10797

New Issue
Closed
opened 2025-12-29 21:36:02 +01:00 by adam · 3 comments
adam commented 2025-12-29 21:36:02 +01:00
Owner
Copy Link

Originally created by @bb-Ricardo on GitHub (Feb 22, 2025).

Originally assigned to: @arthanson on GitHub.

Deployment Type

NetBox Cloud

NetBox Version

v4.2.2

Python Version

3.12

Steps to Reproduce

  1. create a Site "New York"
  2. create as Site Group "USA"
  3. assign site "New York" to Site Group "USA"
  4. create a VLAN group "example group" with scope Site and and site "New York"
  5. create a VLAN "example VLAN" and assign both site "New York" and and group "example group"
  6. change scope of VLAN group "example group" to Site-Group and select group "USA"
  7. try to create a new VLAN "example with issue" and assign both site "New York" and and group "example group"

Expected Behavior

That the VLAN "example with issue" can be assigned to VLAN group "example group" and site "New York" at the same time.

Observed Behavior

Step 7 will fail, even though "example VLAN" is assigned to exactly the same set of site and group

Error message:

VLAN is assigned to group example group (scope: USA); cannot also assign to site New York.

This could be solved by:

  • changing VLAN to use scope as well: dcim.site and ipam.vlangroup
  • permit both but add add constrains checking during add of a VLAN and at the change of the VLAN group scope to not violate the conditions of the currently assigned VLANs to that group
  • make the usage of site and group exclusive for a VLAN. Either site or group, not both.
Originally created by @bb-Ricardo on GitHub (Feb 22, 2025). Originally assigned to: @arthanson on GitHub. ### Deployment Type NetBox Cloud ### NetBox Version v4.2.2 ### Python Version 3.12 ### Steps to Reproduce 1. create a Site "New York" 2. create as Site Group "USA" 3. assign site "New York" to Site Group "USA" 4. create a VLAN group "example group" with scope Site and and site "New York" 5. create a VLAN "example VLAN" and assign both site "New York" and and group "example group" 6. change scope of VLAN group "example group" to Site-Group and select group "USA" 7. try to create a new VLAN "example with issue" and assign both site "New York" and and group "example group" ### Expected Behavior That the VLAN "example with issue" can be assigned to VLAN group "example group" and site "New York" at the same time. ### Observed Behavior Step 7 will fail, even though "example VLAN" is assigned to exactly the same set of site and group Error message: ``` VLAN is assigned to group example group (scope: USA); cannot also assign to site New York. ``` This could be solved by: * changing VLAN to use scope as well: `dcim.site` and `ipam.vlangroup` * permit both but add add constrains checking during add of a VLAN and at the change of the VLAN group scope to not violate the conditions of the currently assigned VLANs to that group * make the usage of site and group exclusive for a VLAN. Either site or group, not both.
adam added the type: bugstatus: acceptedstatus: blockedseverity: low labels 2025-12-29 21:36:02 +01:00
adam closed this issue 2025-12-29 21:36:02 +01:00
adam commented 2025-12-29 21:36:02 +01:00
Author
Owner
Copy Link

@bb-Ricardo commented on GitHub (Feb 22, 2025):

Oh, and this error also occurs when we try to change unrelated attributes of described "example VLAN" in the description above:

Sending PATCH to 'http://netbox.test:80/api/ipam/vlans/49/' with data 'b'{"tags": [{"name": "NetBox-synced"}, {"name": "Source: vcsa"}]}''

Result:

ERROR: NetBox returned: PATCH /api/ipam/vlans/49/ Bad Request
ERROR: NetBox returned body: {'__all__': ['VLAN is assigned to group example group (scope: USA); cannot also assign to site New York.']}
@bb-Ricardo commented on GitHub (Feb 22, 2025): Oh, and this error also occurs when we try to change unrelated attributes of described "example VLAN" in the description above: ``` Sending PATCH to 'http://netbox.test:80/api/ipam/vlans/49/' with data 'b'{"tags": [{"name": "NetBox-synced"}, {"name": "Source: vcsa"}]}'' ``` Result: ``` ERROR: NetBox returned: PATCH /api/ipam/vlans/49/ Bad Request ERROR: NetBox returned body: {'__all__': ['VLAN is assigned to group example group (scope: USA); cannot also assign to site New York.']} ```
adam commented 2025-12-29 21:36:02 +01:00
Author
Owner
Copy Link

@bctiemann commented on GitHub (Feb 24, 2025):

It seems likely this behavior will also manifest in other structures that use scoping, not just VLAN groups/VLANs. Ideally the fix should address all such cases centrally, without redundancy, and note if possible all the object types affected by this issue.

@bctiemann commented on GitHub (Feb 24, 2025): It seems likely this behavior will also manifest in other structures that use scoping, not just VLAN groups/VLANs. Ideally the fix should address all such cases centrally, without redundancy, and note if possible all the object types affected by this issue.
adam commented 2025-12-29 21:36:03 +01:00
Author
Owner
Copy Link

@artiomello commented on GitHub (Mar 27, 2025):

Interestingly enough, this works for existing VLAN objects, that are already assigned to a site/VLAN group. You can change them without this error being triggered. However, newly created VLANs are indeed affected.

@artiomello commented on GitHub (Mar 27, 2025): Interestingly enough, this works for existing VLAN objects, that are already assigned to a site/VLAN group. You can change them without this error being triggered. However, newly created VLANs are indeed affected.
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 severity: low status: accepted status: blocked type: bug
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#10797
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?