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

IP address penetration VRFs #3539

New Issue
Closed
opened 2025-12-29 18:29:46 +01:00 by adam · 2 comments
adam commented 2025-12-29 18:29:46 +01:00
Owner
Copy Link

Originally created by @gavin2love on GitHub (Apr 5, 2020).

Environment

  • Python version: 3.6.8
  • NetBox version: 2.7.11

Now, there is an IP address of / 32, and the binding device can freely choose the VRF range,
For example, I have
1.1.1.0/24
2.2.2.0/24
When I add device IP, I can set VRF of 1.1.1.2/32 to 2.2.2.0/24. This is not supposed to be.

My suggestion is that the front end automatically judges the IP prefix and shortens the options for users to set VRF.

Originally created by @gavin2love on GitHub (Apr 5, 2020). ### Environment * Python version: 3.6.8 * NetBox version: 2.7.11 Now, there is an IP address of / 32, and the binding device can freely choose the VRF range, For example, I have 1.1.1.0/24 2.2.2.0/24 When I add device IP, I can set VRF of 1.1.1.2/32 to 2.2.2.0/24. This is not supposed to be. My suggestion is that the front end automatically judges the IP prefix and shortens the options for users to set VRF.
adam closed this issue 2025-12-29 18:29:46 +01:00
adam commented 2025-12-29 18:29:47 +01:00
Author
Owner
Copy Link

@hSaria commented on GitHub (Apr 5, 2020):

I don't think that's a bug. You can have the same prefix in two different VRFs – those are two different routing tables after all.

@hSaria commented on GitHub (Apr 5, 2020): I don't think that's a bug. You can have the same prefix in two different VRFs – those are two different routing tables after all.
adam commented 2025-12-29 18:29:47 +01:00
Author
Owner
Copy Link

@jeremystretch commented on GitHub (Apr 6, 2020):

This issue has been closed as it does not conform to one of the provided templates as required by the contributing guide. If you'd like to request that your issue be re-opened, please first update the content so that it matches the appropriate template (this may require rewriting your issue entirely).

@jeremystretch commented on GitHub (Apr 6, 2020): This issue has been closed as it does not conform to one of the [provided templates](https://github.com/netbox-community/netbox/issues/new/choose) as required by the [contributing guide](https://github.com/netbox-community/netbox/blob/master/CONTRIBUTING.md). If you'd like to request that your issue be re-opened, please first update the content so that it matches the appropriate template (this may require rewriting your issue entirely).
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#3539
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?