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

SFP+ Breakout cables #351

New Issue
Closed
opened 2025-12-29 16:21:11 +01:00 by adam · 6 comments
adam commented 2025-12-29 16:21:11 +01:00
Owner
Copy Link

Originally created by @rgstori on GitHub (Aug 10, 2016).

Currently one-to-one connections match one network port of a device with another port. I'm currenly employing 4x10g breakout cables from my juniper vcf to four different servers, how can i represent this?

Originally created by @rgstori on GitHub (Aug 10, 2016). Currently one-to-one connections match one network port of a device with another port. I'm currenly employing 4x10g breakout cables from my juniper vcf to four different servers, how can i represent this?
adam closed this issue 2025-12-29 16:21:11 +01:00
adam commented 2025-12-29 16:21:12 +01:00
Author
Owner
Copy Link

@jeremystretch commented on GitHub (Aug 10, 2016):

Your device should treat each cable as a separate interface, so I'd create four 10GE interfaces. For example, on Junos et-0/0/0 would become xe-0/0/0:[0-3].

@jeremystretch commented on GitHub (Aug 10, 2016): Your device should treat each cable as a separate interface, so I'd create four 10GE interfaces. For example, on Junos et-0/0/0 would become xe-0/0/0:[0-3].
adam commented 2025-12-29 16:21:12 +01:00
Author
Owner
Copy Link

@jbro209070 commented on GitHub (Aug 11, 2016):

You could also create a device called "Breakout Cable" and add the four interfaces going to your servers and add a fifth interface connecting to your juniper. This is how i simulated that type of connection. Your breakout cable will play a "middle man device" role in a way.

@jbro209070 commented on GitHub (Aug 11, 2016): You could also create a device called "Breakout Cable" and add the four interfaces going to your servers and add a fifth interface connecting to your juniper. This is how i simulated that type of connection. Your breakout cable will play a "middle man device" role in a way.
adam commented 2025-12-29 16:21:12 +01:00
Author
Owner
Copy Link

@jeremystretch commented on GitHub (Aug 12, 2016):

Definitely don't do that. The breakout cable is treated by the device as four normal interfaces; there's nothing in between.

@jeremystretch commented on GitHub (Aug 12, 2016): Definitely don't do that. The breakout cable is treated by the device as four normal interfaces; there's nothing in between.
adam commented 2025-12-29 16:21:12 +01:00
Author
Owner
Copy Link

@jbro209070 commented on GitHub (Aug 12, 2016):

You can't simulate a 4 to 1 connection in netbox unless you make the cable as a device and have both devices connect to the cable. Yes you could make each individual port and connect them as a 1 to 1 connection, but that leaves the single port that the physical cable is actually connected to on the second device show as unconnected.

@jbro209070 commented on GitHub (Aug 12, 2016): You can't simulate a 4 to 1 connection in netbox unless you make the cable as a device and have both devices connect to the cable. Yes you could make each individual port and connect them as a 1 to 1 connection, but that leaves the single port that the physical cable is actually connected to on the second device show as unconnected.
adam commented 2025-12-29 16:21:12 +01:00
Author
Owner
Copy Link

@Tagnard commented on GitHub (Aug 12, 2016):

You could add the breakout cables connections and not the physical one.

@Tagnard commented on GitHub (Aug 12, 2016): You could add the breakout cables connections and not the physical one.
adam commented 2025-12-29 16:21:12 +01:00
Author
Owner
Copy Link

@jeremystretch commented on GitHub (Aug 12, 2016):

You can't simulate a 4 to 1 connection in netbox

It's not a four-to-one connection; it's four independent one-to-one connections. Installing a breakout cable "breaks out" the four discrete 10G channels, replacing the 40GE interface with four 10GE interfaces. Each has its own cable; they just happen to terminate in the same transceiver. Each interface is treated exactly the same as a normal 10GE interface from the device's perspective, they're just numbered a bit differently.

Here's an example from Junos with a normal 40GE transceiver:

et-0/0/32               up    up
et-0/0/32.0             up    up

The same port with a breakout cable:

xe-0/0/32:0             up    up
xe-0/0/32:0.0           up    up
xe-0/0/32:1             up    up
xe-0/0/32:1.0           up    up
xe-0/0/32:2             up    down
xe-0/0/32:2.0           up    down
xe-0/0/32:3             up    down
xe-0/0/32:3.0           up    down

If you try to abstract the cable itself, you remove these real interfaces from the device, breaking the data model.

@jeremystretch commented on GitHub (Aug 12, 2016): > You can't simulate a 4 to 1 connection in netbox It's not a four-to-one connection; it's four independent one-to-one connections. Installing a breakout cable "breaks out" the four discrete 10G channels, replacing the 40GE interface with four 10GE interfaces. Each has its own cable; they just happen to terminate in the same transceiver. Each interface is treated exactly the same as a normal 10GE interface from the device's perspective, they're just numbered a bit differently. Here's an example from Junos with a normal 40GE transceiver: ``` et-0/0/32 up up et-0/0/32.0 up up ``` The same port with a breakout cable: ``` xe-0/0/32:0 up up xe-0/0/32:0.0 up up xe-0/0/32:1 up up xe-0/0/32:1.0 up up xe-0/0/32:2 up down xe-0/0/32:2.0 up down xe-0/0/32:3 up down xe-0/0/32:3.0 up down ``` If you try to abstract the cable itself, you remove these real interfaces from the device, breaking the data model.
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#351
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?