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

Support for custom fields on cables #3652

New Issue
Closed
opened 2025-12-29 18:30:23 +01:00 by adam · 5 comments
adam commented 2025-12-29 18:30:23 +01:00
Owner
Copy Link

Originally created by @ananace on GitHub (May 7, 2020).

Environment

  • Python version: 3.7.7
  • NetBox version: 2.8.1

Proposed Functionality

Extend custom fields to also support attaching them to cables.

Use Case

Our network technicians would like to be able to add some additional requirements on planned - and connected - cables, for example SFP identities for direct-attach cables.

Database Changes

External Dependencies

Originally created by @ananace on GitHub (May 7, 2020). <!-- NOTE: IF YOUR ISSUE DOES NOT FOLLOW THIS TEMPLATE, IT WILL BE CLOSED. This form is only for proposing specific new features or enhancements. If you have a general idea or question, please post to our mailing list instead of opening an issue: https://groups.google.com/forum/#!forum/netbox-discuss NOTE: Due to an excessive backlog of feature requests, we are not currently accepting any proposals which significantly extend NetBox's feature scope. Please describe the environment in which you are running NetBox. Be sure that you are running an unmodified instance of the latest stable release before submitting a bug report. --> ### Environment * Python version: 3.7.7<!-- Example: 3.6.9 --> * NetBox version: 2.8.1<!-- Example: 2.7.3 --> <!-- Describe in detail the new functionality you are proposing. Include any specific changes to work flows, data models, or the user interface. --> ### Proposed Functionality Extend custom fields to also support attaching them to cables. <!-- Convey an example use case for your proposed feature. Write from the perspective of a NetBox user who would benefit from the proposed functionality and describe how. ---> ### Use Case Our network technicians would like to be able to add some additional requirements on planned - and connected - cables, for example SFP identities for direct-attach cables. <!-- Note any changes to the database schema necessary to support the new feature. For example, does the proposal require adding a new model or field? (Not all new features require database changes.) ---> ### Database Changes <!-- List any new dependencies on external libraries or services that this new feature would introduce. For example, does the proposal require the installation of a new Python package? (Not all new features introduce new dependencies.) --> ### External Dependencies
adam closed this issue 2025-12-29 18:30:23 +01:00
adam commented 2025-12-29 18:30:23 +01:00
Author
Owner
Copy Link

@jeremystretch commented on GitHub (May 7, 2020):

We are not currently entertaining proposals to expand the application of custom fields. Please see the FAQ.

@jeremystretch commented on GitHub (May 7, 2020): We are not currently entertaining proposals to expand the application of custom fields. Please see [the FAQ](https://github.com/netbox-community/netbox/wiki/Frequently-Asked-Questions#can-we-add-custom-fields-to-more-models).
adam commented 2025-12-29 18:30:23 +01:00
Author
Owner
Copy Link

@bT0mm commented on GitHub (May 14, 2020):

It's an issue for my organization too, we need the ability to add custom field to cables.
In our case, different groups are sometimes responsible for providing and installing cords and cables, we need a way to document that.

Please reconsider expanding application of custom fields.
Thanks for your work.

@bT0mm commented on GitHub (May 14, 2020): It's an issue for my organization too, we need the ability to add custom field to cables. In our case, different groups are sometimes responsible for providing and installing cords and cables, we need a way to document that. Please reconsider expanding application of custom fields. Thanks for your work.
adam commented 2025-12-29 18:30:24 +01:00
Author
Owner
Copy Link

@robbagithub commented on GitHub (Aug 6, 2020):

We require to assign security classification to

@robbagithub commented on GitHub (Aug 6, 2020): We require to assign security classification to
adam commented 2025-12-29 18:30:24 +01:00
Author
Owner
Copy Link

@ivanqray commented on GitHub (Aug 27, 2020):

We also need to add this feature. To mark the employee and the date of the cable installation...

@ivanqray commented on GitHub (Aug 27, 2020): We also need to add this feature. To mark the employee and the date of the cable installation...
adam commented 2025-12-29 18:30:24 +01:00
Author
Owner
Copy Link

@JonasKs commented on GitHub (Sep 8, 2020):

The relevant distinction is that primary models have dedicated views (e.g. /dcim/devices/<pk>/ for a device) whereas secondary models do not

@jeremystretch, dcim/cables/<pk>/ exists, though. We also want to add a few custom fields to the cable object.

@JonasKs commented on GitHub (Sep 8, 2020): > The relevant distinction is that primary models have dedicated views (e.g. `/dcim/devices/<pk>/` for a device) whereas secondary models do not @jeremystretch, `dcim/cables/<pk>/` exists, though. We also want to add a few custom fields to the `cable` object.
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#3652
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?