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

Add VLAN state 'planned' #1796

New Issue
Closed
opened 2025-12-29 17:19:11 +01:00 by adam · 6 comments
adam commented 2025-12-29 17:19:11 +01:00
Owner
Copy Link

Originally created by @kasimon on GitHub (Jun 18, 2018).

Issue type

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

Environment

  • Python version: 2.7.13
  • NetBox version: 2.3.3

Description

Please add the state 'planned' to VLANs. There already are the states Active, Reserved and Deprecated, but we would like to add VLANs to netbox once we requested their creation from our networking team, and tagging them as "Reserved" does not really fit well.

Originally created by @kasimon on GitHub (Jun 18, 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: 2.7.13 * NetBox version: 2.3.3 ### Description Please add the state 'planned' to VLANs. There already are the states Active, Reserved and Deprecated, but we would like to add VLANs to netbox once we requested their creation from our networking team, and tagging them as "Reserved" does not really fit well.
adam closed this issue 2025-12-29 17:19:11 +01:00
adam commented 2025-12-29 17:19:11 +01:00
Author
Owner
Copy Link

@jeremystretch commented on GitHub (Jun 19, 2018):

"Planned" doesn't really make sense for a resource allocated from a finite number space. All VLANs (1-4094) are essentially planned already. Why does the "reserved" status not work?

@jeremystretch commented on GitHub (Jun 19, 2018): "Planned" doesn't really make sense for a resource allocated from a finite number space. All VLANs (1-4094) are essentially planned already. Why does the "reserved" status not work?
adam commented 2025-12-29 17:19:12 +01:00
Author
Owner
Copy Link

@kasimon commented on GitHub (Jun 20, 2018):

The use cases I'd like to differentiate would be "Reserved" = "This VLAN (-Range) was handed over to another department, they can do with it whatever they want, we have no control over it" and "Planned" = "We are currently preparing to use this, but it's not yet deployed to production".

@kasimon commented on GitHub (Jun 20, 2018): The use cases I'd like to differentiate would be "Reserved" = "This VLAN (-Range) was handed over to another department, they can do with it whatever they want, we have no control over it" and "Planned" = "We are currently preparing to use this, but it's not yet deployed to production".
adam commented 2025-12-29 17:19:12 +01:00
Author
Owner
Copy Link

@LBegnaud commented on GitHub (Jun 20, 2018):

Could you not use "Active" and assign the other department as a tenant on the VLAN?

@LBegnaud commented on GitHub (Jun 20, 2018): Could you not use "Active" and assign the other department as a tenant on the VLAN?
adam commented 2025-12-29 17:19:12 +01:00
Author
Owner
Copy Link

@kasimon commented on GitHub (Jun 20, 2018):

Yes, that would certainly be a solution. Nevertheless if possible I would prefer states that represent their organisational purpose more directly without a 'mental mapping' required.

@kasimon commented on GitHub (Jun 20, 2018): Yes, that would certainly be a solution. Nevertheless if possible I would prefer states that represent their organisational purpose more directly without a 'mental mapping' required.
adam commented 2025-12-29 17:19:12 +01:00
Author
Owner
Copy Link

@DanSheps commented on GitHub (Jun 20, 2018):

Your state should describe your state (whether it is active, deprecated or reserved), tenant should describe who it actually belongs to.

@DanSheps commented on GitHub (Jun 20, 2018): Your state should describe your state (whether it is active, deprecated or reserved), tenant should describe who it actually belongs to.
adam commented 2025-12-29 17:19:12 +01:00
Author
Owner
Copy Link

@jeremystretch commented on GitHub (Jun 29, 2018):

Closing this out as I really don't see the use of a "planned" state.

@jeremystretch commented on GitHub (Jun 29, 2018): Closing this out as I really don't see the use of a "planned" state.
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
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#1796
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?