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

Deprecate the assignment of VLANs directly to sites #11302

New Issue
Closed
opened 2025-12-29 21:43:18 +01:00 by adam · 3 comments
adam commented 2025-12-29 21:43:18 +01:00
Owner
Copy Link

Originally created by @jeremystretch on GitHub (Jun 20, 2025).

Originally assigned to: @jeremystretch on GitHub.

Proposed Changes

Deprecate the ability to assign a VLAN to a site rather than a VLAN group. This functionality will not break immediately, but will be removed in a future release.

Justification

The recommended approach to VLAN management is to create a VLAN group scoped to the site, and assign VLANs to that group.

Impact

The UI will warn users of VLANs with direct site assignments, and discourage new site assignments.

Originally created by @jeremystretch on GitHub (Jun 20, 2025). Originally assigned to: @jeremystretch on GitHub. ### Proposed Changes Deprecate the ability to assign a VLAN to a site rather than a VLAN group. This functionality will not break immediately, but will be removed in a future release. ### Justification The recommended approach to VLAN management is to create a VLAN group scoped to the site, and assign VLANs to that group. ### Impact The UI will warn users of VLANs with direct site assignments, and discourage new site assignments.
adam added the status: acceptedtype: deprecation labels 2025-12-29 21:43:18 +01:00
adam closed this issue 2025-12-29 21:43:18 +01:00
adam commented 2025-12-29 21:43:19 +01:00
Author
Owner
Copy Link

@sleepinggenius2 commented on GitHub (Jun 20, 2025):

As it looks like the decision has been made to move forward with ultimately removing the site field from the VLAN model (which I do support), I am adding my comment from #19707 to this issue as well:

One other challenge I see is that when you navigate to a site in the UI, it currently only lists related VLANs that are directly associated with that site, not a VLAN group that is scoped to that site. Likewise, the VLAN filter form only allows searching for VLANs that are directly associated with a site. If you remove the site field from the VLAN object, I would request that the functionality that used it, like the two previous examples, be extended to support VLAN Groups that are scoped to a Site as well. I would love to see that functionality be extended to the other scope types, but I can understand where that would probably be a different feature request.

We try to use a consistent naming and numbering scheme for VLANs at each site. A common task our engineers have is to assign a management IP for a new device at a site. Today that can be relatively easily done by filtering the VLANs by site and VID or name, then clicking on the prefix and adding a new IP address. I just tested what that would look like with adding a VLAN Group into that process and it is a lot more cumbersome.

@sleepinggenius2 commented on GitHub (Jun 20, 2025): As it looks like the decision has been made to move forward with ultimately removing the site field from the VLAN model (which I do support), I am adding my comment from #19707 to this issue as well: > One other challenge I see is that when you navigate to a site in the UI, it currently only lists related VLANs that are directly associated with that site, not a VLAN group that is scoped to that site. Likewise, the VLAN filter form only allows searching for VLANs that are directly associated with a site. If you remove the site field from the VLAN object, I would request that the functionality that used it, like the two previous examples, be extended to support VLAN Groups that are scoped to a Site as well. I would love to see that functionality be extended to the other scope types, but I can understand where that would probably be a different feature request. We try to use a consistent naming and numbering scheme for VLANs at each site. A common task our engineers have is to assign a management IP for a new device at a site. Today that can be relatively easily done by filtering the VLANs by site and VID or name, then clicking on the prefix and adding a new IP address. I just tested what that would look like with adding a VLAN Group into that process and it is a lot more cumbersome.
adam commented 2025-12-29 21:43:19 +01:00
Author
Owner
Copy Link

@misch42 commented on GitHub (Jul 10, 2025):

I automation I use jinja templates with the device.site.vlans.all() function to get all vlans that are relevant for the specific device. How to replace this function in the jinja templates?

@misch42 commented on GitHub (Jul 10, 2025): I automation I use jinja templates with the device.site.vlans.all() function to get all vlans that are relevant for the specific device. How to replace this function in the jinja templates?
adam commented 2025-12-29 21:43:20 +01:00
Author
Owner
Copy Link

@falz commented on GitHub (Sep 3, 2025):

See discussion https://github.com/netbox-community/netbox/discussions/20240 about this change

@falz commented on GitHub (Sep 3, 2025): See discussion https://github.com/netbox-community/netbox/discussions/20240 about this change
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: accepted type: deprecation
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#11302
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?