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

Connected endpoint must be an Interface or CircuitTermination, not <class 'dcim.models.RearPort'>. #3036

New Issue
Closed
opened 2025-12-29 18:24:58 +01:00 by adam · 5 comments
adam commented 2025-12-29 18:24:58 +01:00
Owner
Copy Link

Originally created by @robbagithub on GitHub (Nov 26, 2019).

Environment

  • Python version: 3.7.3
  • NetBox version: 2.6.7

Steps to Reproduce

  1. Add device into rack that contains Front ports and rear ports, mapped in a 1:1 relationship
  2. 'Connect' first Front port by clicking on green plus sign
  3. Choose 'Interface'
  4. Search for device that has interfaces to be connected to
  5. Complete remaining options as seen in image below.
  6. Press 'Connect' and error appears.

What did you expect to happen?

  1. Front port to have a connection created to the interface of chosen switch without error page.

What happened instead?

  1. Error page delivered.
  2. Front port connection created to the interface of chosen switch

Connection is created, however the error page is displayed. I've tried creating rear port connections first however this still did not produce a clean addition of a link.

Screenshots

  1. Setup of ports on new patch panel
    ports

  2. Connection creation
    conndection creation

  3. Error Page
    error_page

4.Post error page, cables and connections created
connected_ports

Originally created by @robbagithub on GitHub (Nov 26, 2019). ### Environment * Python version: 3.7.3 * NetBox version: 2.6.7 <!-- Describe in detail the exact steps that someone else can take to reproduce this bug using the current stable release of NetBox (or the current beta release where applicable). Begin with the creation of any necessary database objects and call out every operation being performed explicitly. If reporting a bug in the REST API, be sure to reconstruct the raw HTTP request(s) being made: Don't rely on a wrapper like pynetbox. --> ### Steps to Reproduce 1. Add device into rack that contains Front ports and rear ports, mapped in a 1:1 relationship 2. 'Connect' first Front port by clicking on green plus sign 3. Choose 'Interface' 4. Search for device that has interfaces to be connected to 5. Complete remaining options as seen in image below. 6. Press 'Connect' and error appears. ### What did you expect to happen? 1. Front port to have a connection created to the interface of chosen switch without error page. ### What happened instead? 1. Error page delivered. 2. Front port connection created to the interface of chosen switch Connection is created, however the error page is displayed. I've tried creating rear port connections first however this still did not produce a clean addition of a link. ### Screenshots 1. **Setup of ports on new patch panel** ![ports](https://user-images.githubusercontent.com/22147754/69601901-d5097a00-1069-11ea-9e4a-4364965d7bc4.jpg) 2. **Connection creation** ![conndection creation](https://user-images.githubusercontent.com/22147754/69601974-0f731700-106a-11ea-8571-dd20a842fb78.jpg) 3. **Error Page** ![error_page](https://user-images.githubusercontent.com/22147754/69601986-17cb5200-106a-11ea-9e8c-c15fe20f4c69.jpg) 4.**Post error page, cables and connections created** ![connected_ports](https://user-images.githubusercontent.com/22147754/69602007-26196e00-106a-11ea-94ce-fe083a5d7d01.jpg)
adam closed this issue 2025-12-29 18:24:58 +01:00
adam commented 2025-12-29 18:24:59 +01:00
Author
Owner
Copy Link

@DanSheps commented on GitHub (Nov 26, 2019):

Have you made any modifications to your code? I have never seen this myself, but I will try and reproduce it on the current master branch.

@DanSheps commented on GitHub (Nov 26, 2019): Have you made any modifications to your code? I have never seen this myself, but I will try and reproduce it on the current master branch.
adam commented 2025-12-29 18:24:59 +01:00
Author
Owner
Copy Link

@DanSheps commented on GitHub (Nov 26, 2019):

I was unable to reproduce following the steps provided. Please provide exact steps, with exact specifications of all devices, components, connections, etc involved.

@DanSheps commented on GitHub (Nov 26, 2019): I was unable to reproduce following the steps provided. Please provide **exact** steps, with exact specifications of all devices, components, connections, etc involved.
adam commented 2025-12-29 18:24:59 +01:00
Author
Owner
Copy Link

@mskalecki commented on GitHub (Nov 26, 2019):

It's odd to me that you have Rear Ports named "Front Port N". I think the problem is that you've created both your Front and Rear ports as Rear ports.

I'm able to reproduce this issue when attempting to connect an interface to a Rear Port that doesn't have an associated Front port.

@mskalecki commented on GitHub (Nov 26, 2019): It's odd to me that you have Rear Ports named "Front Port N". I think the problem is that you've created both your Front and Rear ports as Rear ports. I'm able to reproduce this issue when attempting to connect an interface to a Rear Port that doesn't have an associated Front port.
adam commented 2025-12-29 18:24:59 +01:00
Author
Owner
Copy Link

@robbagithub commented on GitHub (Nov 27, 2019):

I've made no modifications to the code.
The copper patch panel has 16 front ports 1:1 mapped to the rear port, hence that device has 16 front ports and 16 rear ports.
In the screen shot above all rear ports are named "rear port" and all front ports are named front port.

I'll attempt to add more exact steps in next post

@robbagithub commented on GitHub (Nov 27, 2019): I've made no modifications to the code. The copper patch panel has 16 front ports 1:1 mapped to the rear port, hence that device has 16 front ports and 16 rear ports. In the screen shot above all rear ports are named "rear port" and all front ports are named front port. I'll attempt to add more exact steps in next post
adam commented 2025-12-29 18:25:00 +01:00
Author
Owner
Copy Link

@robbagithub commented on GitHub (Nov 27, 2019):

So 100% user error!!

Thanks for the find there @mskalecki, the device type had been incorrectly created. 32 rear ports added instead of 16 front and 16 rear. Apologies there. This wasn't an issue in the other device types of patch panels where the ports had been added correctly. We're predominately 12 and 24 ports.

Apologies again and thanks for the assistance.

@robbagithub commented on GitHub (Nov 27, 2019): So 100% user error!! Thanks for the find there @mskalecki, the device type had been incorrectly created. 32 rear ports added instead of 16 front and 16 rear. Apologies there. This wasn't an issue in the other device types of patch panels where the ports had been added correctly. We're predominately 12 and 24 ports. Apologies again and thanks for the assistance.
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#3036
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?