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

Show /32 allocations in child prefixes list #4089

New Issue
Closed
opened 2025-12-29 18:33:02 +01:00 by adam · 1 comment
adam commented 2025-12-29 18:33:02 +01:00
Owner
Copy Link

Originally created by @amuckart on GitHub (Sep 10, 2020).

Environment

  • Python version: 3.6.9
  • NetBox version: 2.9.3

Steps to Reproduce

  1. Create a /24 IPv4 prefix
  2. Create a pair of /29s with a /29 worth of space between them, e.g. .0/29 and .16/29
  3. Create a couple /32 IP addresses from the intervening /29, e.g. .11 and .13
  4. Go to the "Child Prefixes" tab of the /24. The .8/29 prefix is shown as available.
  5. Create the .8/29 prefix, it will show as partially used.

Expected Behavior

The /32 allocations should show up in the Child Prefixes list and should break up blocks of free space, creating /32 or /31s etc. as needed.

I realise that /32 isn't technically a "child prefix" but when allocating loopback addresses they do get assigned directly from the containing /24 and it isn't possible (and doesn't make sense) to create a /32 "prefix" to hold the single IP address.

Observed Behavior

When viewing the "Child Prefixes" tab blocks of space that have /32 IP addresses assigned from inside them show as available and the existence of the /32s doesn't become obvious until you've either created the containing prefix or you check through both the "Child Prefixes" list and the "IP Addresses" list.

For any prefix length than /32, it's entirely sane to require the containing prefix exist and IPs are allocated out of that but individual IPs are a special case.

Originally created by @amuckart on GitHub (Sep 10, 2020). <!-- NOTE: IF YOUR ISSUE DOES NOT FOLLOW THIS TEMPLATE, IT WILL BE CLOSED. This form is only for reproducible bugs. If you need assistance with NetBox installation, or if you have a general question, DO NOT open an issue. Instead, post to our mailing list: https://groups.google.com/forum/#!forum/netbox-discuss 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, and that any plugins have been disabled. --> ### Environment * Python version: 3.6.9 * NetBox version: 2.9.3 <!-- Describe in detail the exact steps that someone else can take to reproduce this bug using the current stable release of NetBox. 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 client library such as pynetbox. --> ### Steps to Reproduce 1. Create a /24 IPv4 prefix 2. Create a pair of /29s with a /29 worth of space between them, e.g. .0/29 and .16/29 3. Create a couple /32 IP addresses from the intervening /29, e.g. .11 and .13 3. Go to the "Child Prefixes" tab of the /24. The .8/29 prefix is shown as available. 4. Create the .8/29 prefix, it will show as partially used. <!-- What did you expect to happen? --> ### Expected Behavior The /32 allocations should show up in the Child Prefixes list and should break up blocks of free space, creating /32 or /31s etc. as needed. I realise that /32 isn't technically a "child prefix" but when allocating loopback addresses they do get assigned directly from the containing /24 and it isn't possible (and doesn't make sense) to create a /32 "prefix" to hold the single IP address. <!-- What happened instead? --> ### Observed Behavior When viewing the "Child Prefixes" tab blocks of space that have /32 IP addresses assigned from inside them show as available and the existence of the /32s doesn't become obvious until you've either created the containing prefix or you check through both the "Child Prefixes" list and the "IP Addresses" list. For any prefix length than /32, it's entirely sane to require the containing prefix exist and IPs are allocated out of that but individual IPs are a special case.
adam closed this issue 2025-12-29 18:33:02 +01:00
adam commented 2025-12-29 18:33:03 +01:00
Author
Owner
Copy Link

@jeremystretch commented on GitHub (Sep 14, 2020):

This is expected behavior. Before allocating the /32s, you should create a /29 container prefix for them. This ensures that the space is allocated for the purpose of provisioning loopback IPs.

@jeremystretch commented on GitHub (Sep 14, 2020): This is expected behavior. Before allocating the /32s, you should create a /29 container prefix for them. This ensures that the space is allocated for the purpose of provisioning loopback IPs.
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#4089
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?