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

Allow the grouping together of virtual interfaces into a LAG or virtual bond interface. #4307

New Issue
Closed
opened 2025-12-29 18:34:33 +01:00 by adam · 4 comments
adam commented 2025-12-29 18:34:33 +01:00
Owner
Copy Link

Originally created by @tomkivlin on GitHub (Nov 25, 2020).

Environment

  • Python version: 3.7
  • NetBox version: 2.8.5

Proposed Functionality

Allow the grouping together of virtual interfaces into a "LAG" or virtual bond interface. Suggestions include defining a new interface type (e.g. bond) or allowing the use of parent LAG for virtual interfaces.

Use Case

My use case is using Netbox configuration data to drive the configuration of machines in MaaS, which then deploys and configures the operating system deployed. For example a server host might have the following physical interfaces:

  • FLR1
  • FLR2
  • FLR3
  • FLR4
  • PCI1.1
  • PCI1.2

There are also virtual interfaces in Netbox, e.g.:

  • eno1
  • eno2
  • eno3
  • eno4
  • ens2f0
  • ens2f1

Today, I can create a virtual interface of type LAG and then use that as the parent LAG for any of the physical interfaces, but if I try and group the virtual interfaces together - as I would when creating a Linux bond - I get the following error:
image

Database Changes

I don't know.

External Dependencies

I don't know.

Originally created by @tomkivlin on GitHub (Nov 25, 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/g/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 * NetBox version: 2.8.5 <!-- Describe in detail the new functionality you are proposing. Include any specific changes to work flows, data models, or the user interface. --> ### Proposed Functionality Allow the grouping together of virtual interfaces into a "LAG" or virtual bond interface. Suggestions include defining a new interface type (e.g. bond) or allowing the use of parent LAG for virtual interfaces. <!-- 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 My use case is using Netbox configuration data to drive the configuration of machines in MaaS, which then deploys and configures the operating system deployed. For example a server host might have the following physical interfaces: - FLR1 - FLR2 - FLR3 - FLR4 - PCI1.1 - PCI1.2 There are also virtual interfaces in Netbox, e.g.: - eno1 - eno2 - eno3 - eno4 - ens2f0 - ens2f1 Today, I can create a virtual interface of type LAG and then use that as the parent LAG for any of the physical interfaces, but if I try and group the virtual interfaces together - as I would when creating a Linux bond - I get the following error: ![image](https://user-images.githubusercontent.com/52716470/100255976-16ae5880-2f3c-11eb-8d06-6d503f96cd23.png) <!-- 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 I don't know. <!-- 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 I don't know.
adam added the status: duplicate label 2025-12-29 18:34:33 +01:00
adam closed this issue 2025-12-29 18:34:33 +01:00
adam commented 2025-12-29 18:34:33 +01:00
Author
Owner
Copy Link

@tomkivlin commented on GitHub (Nov 25, 2020):

PS I did check but it looks like f37997ac54 still has this constraint in place.

@tomkivlin commented on GitHub (Nov 25, 2020): PS I did check but it looks like https://github.com/netbox-community/netbox/pull/5034/commits/f37997ac5433ac0f43ddc1457d4c6c88034d6990 still has this constraint in place.
adam commented 2025-12-29 18:34:34 +01:00
Author
Owner
Copy Link

@DanSheps commented on GitHub (Nov 26, 2020):

This should be addressed by #1519

@DanSheps commented on GitHub (Nov 26, 2020): This should be addressed by #1519
adam commented 2025-12-29 18:34:34 +01:00
Author
Owner
Copy Link

@DanSheps commented on GitHub (Nov 26, 2020):

Duplicate of #1519

@DanSheps commented on GitHub (Nov 26, 2020): Duplicate of #1519
adam commented 2025-12-29 18:34:36 +01:00
Author
Owner
Copy Link

@tomkivlin commented on GitHub (Nov 26, 2020):

Duplicate of #1519

@DanSheps ok thanks. I wasn't sure as the example used in the latest comment was about the parent still being physical. If the intent of #1519 is to allow the following relationshis then that's fab!

  • Physical interface1---virtual interface1
  • Physical interface1---virtual interface2
    -Virtual interface1 + virtual interface2 both children of bond0
  • Bond0---bond0.100 virtual.interface

Ta
Tom

@tomkivlin commented on GitHub (Nov 26, 2020): > Duplicate of #1519 @DanSheps ok thanks. I wasn't sure as the example used in the latest comment was about the parent still being physical. If the intent of #1519 is to allow the following relationshis then that's fab! - Physical interface1---virtual interface1 - Physical interface1---virtual interface2 -Virtual interface1 + virtual interface2 both children of bond0 - Bond0---bond0.100 virtual.interface Ta Tom
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 status: duplicate
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#4307
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?