starred/netbox
1
0
Fork 0
mirror of https://github.com/netbox-community/netbox.git synced 2026-01-13 13:53:31 +01:00
Code Issues 273 Packages Projects Releases 10 Wiki Activity

IPAM Prefixes subnet tree structure modification #10953

New Issue
Closed
opened 2025-12-29 21:38:15 +01:00 by adam · 4 comments
adam commented 2025-12-29 21:38:15 +01:00
Owner
Copy Link

Originally created by @momario on GitHub (Mar 26, 2025).

NetBox version

v4.1.7

Feature type

New functionality

Proposed functionality

IPAM - Prefixes: If the VRF is set in a subnet and in the view is filtered to "Max Depth = 0", the subnets assigned to a VRF are showed beside the Global VRF entries. That's OK, but it would be nice, to have an option to ignore the VRF assignment in the filter.

For example:
Without VRF ignore: (10.2.192.0/26 -> is not in the Global VRF)
10.0.0.0/8
10.2.192.0/26

With VRF ignore:
10.0.0.0/8

  • 10.2.192.0/26

Use case

When the VRF assignment does not matter for the tree structure and the user expects a subnetto be intended under a supernet, like in the example, this functionality would be helpful.

Database changes

No response

External dependencies

No response

Originally created by @momario on GitHub (Mar 26, 2025). ### NetBox version v4.1.7 ### Feature type New functionality ### Proposed functionality IPAM - Prefixes: If the VRF is set in a subnet and in the view is filtered to "Max Depth = 0", the subnets assigned to a VRF are showed beside the Global VRF entries. That's OK, but it would be nice, to have an option to ignore the VRF assignment in the filter. **For example:** Without VRF ignore: (10.2.192.0/26 -> is not in the Global VRF) 10.0.0.0/8 10.2.192.0/26 With VRF ignore: 10.0.0.0/8 - 10.2.192.0/26 ### Use case When the VRF assignment does not matter for the tree structure and the user expects a subnetto be intended under a supernet, like in the example, this functionality would be helpful. ### Database changes _No response_ ### External dependencies _No response_
adam added the type: featurepending closurestatus: revisions needed labels 2025-12-29 21:38:15 +01:00
adam closed this issue 2025-12-29 21:38:16 +01:00
adam commented 2025-12-29 21:38:16 +01:00
Author
Owner
Copy Link

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

@momario , can you cite a specific example where this would be useful?

@jnovinger commented on GitHub (Mar 27, 2025): @momario , can you cite a specific example where this would be useful?
adam commented 2025-12-29 21:38:17 +01:00
Author
Owner
Copy Link

@momario commented on GitHub (Mar 28, 2025):

Hi Jason!Thanks for taking care of my request.For example:We have a supernet for a site 10.30.0.0/22 which has no VRF assigned.Then we have a network for pc's 10.30.2.0/26 (without VRF) and a segmented printer network, which has the subnet 10.30.1.32/27 (VRF printer).In the ipam tab, the printer subnet and the supernet are both shown in the filter with max depth 0, but in our case it would be nice to ignore the vrf and nest the printer subnet below it's supernet, because it belongs to the site.Kind regards, Mario FreudenburgAm 27.03.25, 18:55 schrieb Jason Novinger @.***>:

@momario , can you cite a specific example where this would be useful?—Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub, or unsubscribe.You are receiving this because you were mentioned.Message ID: @.***>

jnovinger left a comment (netbox-community/netbox#19009)
@momario , can you cite a specific example where this would be useful?

—Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub, or unsubscribe.You are receiving this because you were mentioned.Message ID: @.***>

@momario commented on GitHub (Mar 28, 2025): Hi Jason!Thanks for taking care of my request.For example:We have a supernet for a site 10.30.0.0/22 which has no VRF assigned.Then we have a network for pc's 10.30.2.0/26 (without VRF) and a segmented printer network, which has the subnet 10.30.1.32/27 (VRF printer).In the ipam tab, the printer subnet and the supernet are both shown in the filter with max depth 0, but in our case it would be nice to ignore the vrf and nest the printer subnet below it's supernet, because it belongs to the site.Kind regards, Mario FreudenburgAm 27.03.25, 18:55 schrieb Jason Novinger ***@***.***>: @momario , can you cite a specific example where this would be useful?—Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub, or unsubscribe.You are receiving this because you were mentioned.Message ID: ***@***.***> jnovinger left a comment (netbox-community/netbox#19009) @momario , can you cite a specific example where this would be useful? —Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub, or unsubscribe.You are receiving this because you were mentioned.Message ID: ***@***.***>
adam commented 2025-12-29 21:38:17 +01:00
Author
Owner
Copy Link

@jeremystretch commented on GitHub (Mar 28, 2025):

It sounds like you're either misusing VRFs or have misunderstood their purpose. A VRF represents an isolated layer three domain with its own address space. Collapsing these together would not make sense as it would just result in duplicated prefixes with no way to discern among them.

@jeremystretch commented on GitHub (Mar 28, 2025): It sounds like you're either misusing VRFs or have misunderstood their purpose. A VRF represents an isolated layer three domain with its own address space. Collapsing these together would not make sense as it would just result in duplicated prefixes with no way to discern among them.
adam commented 2025-12-29 21:38:17 +01:00
Author
Owner
Copy Link

@github-actions[bot] commented on GitHub (Apr 5, 2025):

This is a reminder that additional information is needed in order to further triage this issue. If the requested details are not provided, the issue will soon be closed automatically.

@github-actions[bot] commented on GitHub (Apr 5, 2025): This is a reminder that additional information is needed in order to further triage this issue. If the requested details are not provided, the issue will soon be closed automatically.
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 pending closure status: revisions needed 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#10953
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?