starred/netbox
1
0
Fork 0
mirror of https://github.com/netbox-community/netbox.git synced 2026-01-13 22:03:32 +01:00
Code Issues 273 Packages Projects Releases 10 Wiki Activity

L2VPN more than 2 terminations #11122

New Issue
Closed
opened 2025-12-29 21:40:37 +01:00 by adam · 2 comments
adam commented 2025-12-29 21:40:37 +01:00
Owner
Copy Link

Originally created by @MarlonSieker on GitHub (May 5, 2025).

NetBox version

v4.3.0

Feature type

Change to existing functionality

Proposed functionality

Make it possible to create more than 2 terminations on a L2VPN.

Use case

We configured a VPWS Instance between 3 Devices with ESI-LAG. To display this, we need to add 3 or more terminations to a L2VPN.

Database changes

No response

External dependencies

No response

Originally created by @MarlonSieker on GitHub (May 5, 2025). ### NetBox version v4.3.0 ### Feature type Change to existing functionality ### Proposed functionality Make it possible to create more than 2 terminations on a L2VPN. ### Use case We configured a VPWS Instance between 3 Devices with ESI-LAG. To display this, we need to add 3 or more terminations to a L2VPN. ### Database changes _No response_ ### External dependencies _No response_
adam added the type: featurestatus: under review labels 2025-12-29 21:40:38 +01:00
adam closed this issue 2025-12-29 21:40:38 +01:00
adam commented 2025-12-29 21:40:39 +01:00
Author
Owner
Copy Link

@DanSheps commented on GitHub (May 8, 2025):

Could you give a detailed breakdown of how this should be modelled?

For instance, should a new type be defined (VPWS-EVPN) that allows for a VPWS between multiple devices when one end of the termination points is a LAG? Should it be modelled as separate L2VPNs that are bundled together?

What database changes do you believe we need to make to support this?

Technically, you are correct that you can create a VPWS between multiple devices if one end of that VPWS is a lag bonded using EVPN ESI Multi-homing, which we currently cannot model.

@DanSheps commented on GitHub (May 8, 2025): Could you give a detailed breakdown of how this should be modelled? For instance, should a new type be defined (VPWS-EVPN) that allows for a VPWS between multiple devices when one end of the termination points is a LAG? Should it be modelled as separate L2VPNs that are bundled together? What database changes do you believe we need to make to support this? Technically, you are correct that you can create a VPWS between multiple devices if one end of that VPWS is a lag bonded using EVPN ESI Multi-homing, which we currently cannot model.
adam commented 2025-12-29 21:40:39 +01:00
Author
Owner
Copy Link

@MarlonSieker commented on GitHub (May 9, 2025):

Actually, EVPN-VPWS is exactly what we need. I didn't notice that this already exists as a type. Maybe you can split the termination to different sites (on type EVPN-VPWS) as default, to display the relationship a bit better.
Example:

Image

In my opinion this isn't really necesarry, but a nice to have.
Another possibility is to model Multi-homing ESI-LAGs in a way like in issue #18796.

@MarlonSieker commented on GitHub (May 9, 2025): Actually, EVPN-VPWS is exactly what we need. I didn't notice that this already exists as a type. Maybe you can split the termination to different sites (on type EVPN-VPWS) as default, to display the relationship a bit better. Example: ![Image](https://github.com/user-attachments/assets/4c0f09ba-3f22-4af8-a023-7117d1df4945) In my opinion this isn't really necesarry, but a nice to have. Another possibility is to model Multi-homing ESI-LAGs in a way like in issue #18796.
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 status: under review 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#11122
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?