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

Device Physical Port Utilization #1612

New Issue
Closed
opened 2025-12-29 16:33:29 +01:00 by adam · 3 comments
adam commented 2025-12-29 16:33:29 +01:00
Owner
Copy Link

Originally created by @tuxmelv on GitHub (Mar 8, 2018).

Issue type

[ X ] Feature request
[ ] Bug report
[ ] Documentation

Environment

  • Python version: 3.5.2
  • NetBox version: 2.3.1

Description

It would be nice to have a per device Interface Utilization based on Connections already in Netbox vs the total number of physical ports configured. Virtual interfaces would be excluded. Utilization graph would be present on the Devices list as well as in the header of the "Interfaces" table when viewing a specific Device. The ability to exclude interfaces from this feature would allow uplink ports to not be counted.

If possible, a stacked graph that shows used ports similar to the existing Rack or Prefix utilization graphs, but also includes another color for planned connections.

Feature would assist in Capacity Planing based on Physically available ports in a readily viable format

Originally created by @tuxmelv on GitHub (Mar 8, 2018). ### Issue type [ X ] Feature request <!-- An enhancement of existing functionality --> [ ] Bug report <!-- Unexpected or erroneous behavior --> [ ] Documentation <!-- A modification to the documentation --> ### Environment * Python version: 3.5.2 * NetBox version: 2.3.1 ### Description It would be nice to have a per device Interface Utilization based on Connections already in Netbox vs the total number of physical ports configured. Virtual interfaces would be excluded. Utilization graph would be present on the Devices list as well as in the header of the "Interfaces" table when viewing a specific Device. The ability to exclude interfaces from this feature would allow uplink ports to not be counted. If possible, a stacked graph that shows used ports similar to the existing Rack or Prefix utilization graphs, but also includes another color for planned connections. Feature would assist in Capacity Planing based on Physically available ports in a readily viable format
adam added the type: featurestatus: needs ownerpending closure labels 2025-12-29 16:33:29 +01:00
adam closed this issue 2025-12-29 16:33:29 +01:00
adam commented 2025-12-29 16:33:29 +01:00
Author
Owner
Copy Link

@snowie-swe commented on GitHub (Mar 15, 2019):

As it has to do with capacity planning I believe it’s good that you have the option in settings or elsewhere to toggle how this should be counted

Ie

  • connected
  • planned
  • interface with description
@snowie-swe commented on GitHub (Mar 15, 2019): As it has to do with capacity planning I believe it’s good that you have the option in settings or elsewhere to toggle how this should be counted Ie - connected - planned - interface with description
adam commented 2025-12-29 16:33:30 +01:00
Author
Owner
Copy Link

@stale[bot] commented on GitHub (Sep 7, 2020):

This issue has been automatically marked as stale because it has not had recent activity. It will be closed if no further activity occurs. NetBox is governed by a small group of core maintainers which means not all opened issues may receive direct feedback. Please see our contributing guide.

@stale[bot] commented on GitHub (Sep 7, 2020): This issue has been automatically marked as stale because it has not had recent activity. It will be closed if no further activity occurs. NetBox is governed by a small group of core maintainers which means not all opened issues may receive direct feedback. Please see our [contributing guide](https://github.com/netbox-community/netbox/blob/develop/CONTRIBUTING.md).
adam commented 2025-12-29 16:33:30 +01:00
Author
Owner
Copy Link

@stale[bot] commented on GitHub (Sep 23, 2020):

This issue has been automatically closed due to lack of activity. In an effort to reduce noise, please do not comment any further. Note that the core maintainers may elect to reopen this issue at a later date if deemed necessary.

@stale[bot] commented on GitHub (Sep 23, 2020): This issue has been automatically closed due to lack of activity. In an effort to reduce noise, please do not comment any further. Note that the core maintainers may elect to reopen this issue at a later date if deemed necessary.
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: needs owner 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#1612
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?