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

Cable trace does not follow correctly #2637

New Issue
Closed
opened 2025-12-29 18:20:44 +01:00 by adam · 3 comments
adam commented 2025-12-29 18:20:44 +01:00
Owner
Copy Link

Originally created by @Pelt10 on GitHub (May 28, 2019).

(Sorry for my bad English...)

Environment

  • Python version: Python 2.7.13
  • NetBox version: netbox-2.5.12

Steps to Reproduce

  1. Create 2 Devices (Device-A and Device B) : 1 interface on each device
  2. Create 2 MUXs*
  3. Create 2 Patch Panels**
  4. Create 2 duplex-adaptators***
  5. Connect output of duplex-adaptator to interfaces of device
  6. Connect the 2 inputs of duplex-adaptator to the MUXs : input-1 to Tx-CH28 and input-2 to Rx-CH28
  7. Connect the 2 COM ports of the MUXs to Patch Panels : Tx-COM to A1 and Rx-COM to A2
  8. Connect the Rear Port of the Patch Panels together
Click to expand

* MUX device page
MUX

** Patch Panel device page
PP

*** duplex-adaptator device page
duplex

Expected Behavior

The follow path tool on the interface of device connect to other device.

Observed Behavior

The follow path tool stop to the MUX, on the MON port.

image

Originally created by @Pelt10 on GitHub (May 28, 2019). (Sorry for my bad English...) ### Environment * Python version: Python 2.7.13 * NetBox version: netbox-2.5.12 ### Steps to Reproduce 1. Create 2 Devices (Device-A and Device B) : 1 interface on each device 2. Create 2 MUXs* 3. Create 2 Patch Panels** 4. Create 2 duplex-adaptators*** 5. Connect output of duplex-adaptator to interfaces of device 6. Connect the 2 inputs of duplex-adaptator to the MUXs : input-1 to Tx-CH28 and input-2 to Rx-CH28 7. Connect the 2 COM ports of the MUXs to Patch Panels : Tx-COM to A1 and Rx-COM to A2 8. Connect the Rear Port of the Patch Panels together <details> <summary>Click to expand</summary> \* MUX device page ![MUX](https://user-images.githubusercontent.com/7582586/58444670-90704680-80f9-11e9-8a4d-807e10d25ee5.png) \** Patch Panel device page ![PP](https://user-images.githubusercontent.com/7582586/58444818-19877d80-80fa-11e9-9fc0-ec76fc515267.png) \*** duplex-adaptator device page ![duplex](https://user-images.githubusercontent.com/7582586/58444884-72efac80-80fa-11e9-8347-16395fa5c603.png) </details> ### Expected Behavior The follow path tool on the interface of device connect to other device. ### Observed Behavior The follow path tool stop to the MUX, on the MON port. ![image](https://user-images.githubusercontent.com/7582586/58445165-daf2c280-80fb-11e9-81b7-f2bf9d7ed6ea.png)
adam added the status: duplicate label 2025-12-29 18:20:44 +01:00
adam closed this issue 2025-12-29 18:20:44 +01:00
adam commented 2025-12-29 18:20:45 +01:00
Author
Owner
Copy Link

@DanSheps commented on GitHub (May 28, 2019):

I am 99.999% sure we cannot support this scenario (yet, who knows in the future) and this is why you are getting the results you are..

Perhaps @lampwins or @jeremystretch can confirm for me

@DanSheps commented on GitHub (May 28, 2019): I am 99.999% sure we cannot support this scenario (yet, who knows in the future) and this is why you are getting the results you are.. Perhaps @lampwins or @jeremystretch can confirm for me
adam commented 2025-12-29 18:20:45 +01:00
Author
Owner
Copy Link

@fablabo commented on GitHub (May 28, 2019):

This is similar to #3193. You can't have patchpanels between MUXes without loosing the ability to trace channel to channel. My workaround for this is creating a 'physical common' and a 'virtual common' on the MUXes. Connecting the phycial common to the patchpanels and a virtual common directly between the MUXes.

@fablabo commented on GitHub (May 28, 2019): This is similar to #3193. You can't have patchpanels between MUXes without loosing the ability to trace channel to channel. My workaround for this is creating a 'physical common' and a 'virtual common' on the MUXes. Connecting the phycial common to the patchpanels and a virtual common directly between the MUXes.
adam commented 2025-12-29 18:20:45 +01:00
Author
Owner
Copy Link

@DanSheps commented on GitHub (May 28, 2019):

Exactly, it is just the way the trace mechanism works

@DanSheps commented on GitHub (May 28, 2019): Exactly, it is just the way the trace mechanism works
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: duplicate
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#2637
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?