starred/netbox
1
0
Fork 0
mirror of https://github.com/netbox-community/netbox.git synced 2026-01-13 13:53:31 +01:00
Code Issues 273 Packages Projects Releases 10 Wiki Activity

attribute "last_updated" not updated when primary IP gets removed from device/virtual machine #4334

New Issue
Closed
opened 2025-12-29 18:34:51 +01:00 by adam · 5 comments
adam commented 2025-12-29 18:34:51 +01:00
Owner
Copy Link

Originally created by @bb-Ricardo on GitHub (Dec 4, 2020).

Originally assigned to: @jeremystretch on GitHub.

Environment

  • Python version: 3.6.8
  • NetBox version: 3.9.10

Steps to Reproduce (assuming we have a VM with a assigned primary ip)

  1. query API data of said virtual machine
  2. delete assigned primary IP
  3. query API data of said virtual machine again

Expected Behavior

The last_updated attribute is set to a current time/date value

Observed Behavior

The last_updated attribute is still the same as from before the deletion of the primary IP

Note

Adding an Primary IP updates the last_updated attribute correctly

Example

curl -X GET https://example.com/api/virtualization/virtual-machines/128/?exclude=config_context
{
    "id": 128,
    "url": "https://example.com/api/virtualization/virtual-machines/128/",
    "name": "git",
    "status": {
        "value": "active",
        "label": "Active"
    },
    "site": {
        "id": 1,
        "url": "https://example.com/api/dcim/sites/1/",
        "name": "New York",
        "slug": "new-york"
    },
    "cluster": {
        "id": 4,
        "url": "https://example.com/api/virtualization/clusters/4/",
        "name": "East"
    },
    "role": {
        "id": 8,
        "url": "https://example.com/api/dcim/device-roles/8/",
        "name": "Server",
        "slug": "server"
    },
    "tenant": null,
    "platform": {
        "id": 13,
        "url": "https://example.com/api/dcim/platforms/13/",
        "name": "CentOS 8 (64-bit)",
        "slug": "centos-8-64-bit"
    },
    "primary_ip": {
        "id": 871,
        "url": "https://example.com/api/ipam/ip-addresses/871/",
        "family": 4,
        "address": "10.1.2.3/24"
    },
    "primary_ip4": {
        "id": 871,
        "url": "https://example.com/api/ipam/ip-addresses/871/",
        "family": 4,
        "address": "10.1.2.3/24"
    },
    "primary_ip6": null,
    "vcpus": 4,
    "memory": 8192,
    "disk": 74,
    "comments": "",
    "local_context_data": null,
    "tags": [],
    "custom_fields": {
        "tos_uuid": null
    },
    "created": "2020-11-30",
    "last_updated": "2020-11-30T15:06:11.441024Z"
}

curl -X DELETE "https://example.com/api/ipam/ip-addresses/871/"

curl -X GET https://example.com/api/virtualization/virtual-machines/128/?exclude=config_context
{
    "id": 128,
    "url": "https://example.com/api/virtualization/virtual-machines/128/",
    "name": "git",
    "status": {
        "value": "active",
        "label": "Active"
    },
    "site": {
        "id": 1,
        "url": "https://example.com/api/dcim/sites/1/",
        "name": "New York",
        "slug": "new-york"
    },
    "cluster": {
        "id": 4,
        "url": "https://example.com/api/virtualization/clusters/4/",
        "name": "East"
    },
    "role": {
        "id": 8,
        "url": "https://example.com/api/dcim/device-roles/8/",
        "name": "Server",
        "slug": "server"
    },
    "tenant": null,
    "platform": {
        "id": 13,
        "url": "https://example.com/api/dcim/platforms/13/",
        "name": "CentOS 8 (64-bit)",
        "slug": "centos-8-64-bit"
    },
    "primary_ip": null,
    "primary_ip4": null,
    "primary_ip6": null,
    "vcpus": 4,
    "memory": 8192,
    "disk": 74,
    "comments": "",
    "local_context_data": null,
    "tags": [],
    "custom_fields": {
        "tos_uuid": null
    },
    "created": "2020-11-30",
    "last_updated": "2020-11-30T15:06:11.441024Z"
}
Originally created by @bb-Ricardo on GitHub (Dec 4, 2020). Originally assigned to: @jeremystretch on GitHub. <!-- 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/g/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: 3.6.8 * NetBox version: 3.9.10 <!-- 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 (assuming we have a VM with a assigned primary ip) 1. query API data of said virtual machine 2. delete assigned primary IP 3. query API data of said virtual machine again <!-- What did you expect to happen? --> ### Expected Behavior The `last_updated` attribute is set to a current time/date value <!-- What happened instead? --> ### Observed Behavior The `last_updated` attribute is still the same as from before the deletion of the primary IP ### Note Adding an Primary IP updates the `last_updated` attribute correctly ### Example ``` curl -X GET https://example.com/api/virtualization/virtual-machines/128/?exclude=config_context { "id": 128, "url": "https://example.com/api/virtualization/virtual-machines/128/", "name": "git", "status": { "value": "active", "label": "Active" }, "site": { "id": 1, "url": "https://example.com/api/dcim/sites/1/", "name": "New York", "slug": "new-york" }, "cluster": { "id": 4, "url": "https://example.com/api/virtualization/clusters/4/", "name": "East" }, "role": { "id": 8, "url": "https://example.com/api/dcim/device-roles/8/", "name": "Server", "slug": "server" }, "tenant": null, "platform": { "id": 13, "url": "https://example.com/api/dcim/platforms/13/", "name": "CentOS 8 (64-bit)", "slug": "centos-8-64-bit" }, "primary_ip": { "id": 871, "url": "https://example.com/api/ipam/ip-addresses/871/", "family": 4, "address": "10.1.2.3/24" }, "primary_ip4": { "id": 871, "url": "https://example.com/api/ipam/ip-addresses/871/", "family": 4, "address": "10.1.2.3/24" }, "primary_ip6": null, "vcpus": 4, "memory": 8192, "disk": 74, "comments": "", "local_context_data": null, "tags": [], "custom_fields": { "tos_uuid": null }, "created": "2020-11-30", "last_updated": "2020-11-30T15:06:11.441024Z" } curl -X DELETE "https://example.com/api/ipam/ip-addresses/871/" curl -X GET https://example.com/api/virtualization/virtual-machines/128/?exclude=config_context { "id": 128, "url": "https://example.com/api/virtualization/virtual-machines/128/", "name": "git", "status": { "value": "active", "label": "Active" }, "site": { "id": 1, "url": "https://example.com/api/dcim/sites/1/", "name": "New York", "slug": "new-york" }, "cluster": { "id": 4, "url": "https://example.com/api/virtualization/clusters/4/", "name": "East" }, "role": { "id": 8, "url": "https://example.com/api/dcim/device-roles/8/", "name": "Server", "slug": "server" }, "tenant": null, "platform": { "id": 13, "url": "https://example.com/api/dcim/platforms/13/", "name": "CentOS 8 (64-bit)", "slug": "centos-8-64-bit" }, "primary_ip": null, "primary_ip4": null, "primary_ip6": null, "vcpus": 4, "memory": 8192, "disk": 74, "comments": "", "local_context_data": null, "tags": [], "custom_fields": { "tos_uuid": null }, "created": "2020-11-30", "last_updated": "2020-11-30T15:06:11.441024Z" } ```
adam added the type: bugstatus: accepted labels 2025-12-29 18:34:51 +01:00
adam closed this issue 2025-12-29 18:34:51 +01:00
adam commented 2025-12-29 18:34:52 +01:00
Author
Owner
Copy Link

@jeremystretch commented on GitHub (Dec 4, 2020):

The problem here is that the disassociation of the deleted IP address is being handled at the database level: save() on the device/VM never gets called to update the primary_ip4 or primary_ip6 field.

@jeremystretch commented on GitHub (Dec 4, 2020): The problem here is that the disassociation of the deleted IP address is being handled at the database level: `save()` on the device/VM never gets called to update the `primary_ip4` or `primary_ip6` field.
adam commented 2025-12-29 18:34:52 +01:00
Author
Owner
Copy Link

@DanSheps commented on GitHub (Dec 9, 2020):

We could update the device model from the IPAddress model, but... This would trigger a webhook or any other defined signals. Would we want this behaviour?

@DanSheps commented on GitHub (Dec 9, 2020): We could update the device model from the IPAddress model, but... This would trigger a webhook or any other defined signals. Would we want this behaviour?
adam commented 2025-12-29 18:34:52 +01:00
Author
Owner
Copy Link

@bb-Ricardo commented on GitHub (Dec 10, 2020):

Would a database trigger be enough?

@bb-Ricardo commented on GitHub (Dec 10, 2020): Would a database trigger be enough?
adam commented 2025-12-29 18:34:52 +01:00
Author
Owner
Copy Link

@jeremystretch commented on GitHub (Dec 11, 2020):

This would trigger a webhook or any other defined signals. Would we want this behaviour?

Strictly speaking, this behavior would be required. The parent device/VM is being modified via the deletion of an assigned primary IP, so that change needs to be communicated just as if the object was being modified directly.

Would a database trigger be enough?

It would be sufficient to update the field, but not to invoke the complete change logging process (creating a change record and triggering any webhooks).

I see two options:

  • Option A: Hook into the pre_delete signal for IPAddress and manually nullify the primary_ip* field of a parent object as needed.
  • Option B: Change the on_delete behavior for these fields from SET_NULL to PROTECT. This would force the user to remove the primary IP designation before allowing the IP address to be deleted.

IMO A is the preferred approach because it preserves the existing behavior, but I'm open to arguments in support of option B.

@jeremystretch commented on GitHub (Dec 11, 2020): > This would trigger a webhook or any other defined signals. Would we want this behaviour? Strictly speaking, this behavior would be required. The parent device/VM is being modified via the deletion of an assigned primary IP, so that change needs to be communicated just as if the object was being modified directly. > Would a database trigger be enough? It would be sufficient to update the field, but not to invoke the complete change logging process (creating a change record and triggering any webhooks). I see two options: * **Option A:** Hook into the `pre_delete` signal for IPAddress and manually nullify the `primary_ip*` field of a parent object as needed. * **Option B:** Change the `on_delete` behavior for these fields from `SET_NULL` to `PROTECT`. This would force the user to remove the primary IP designation before allowing the IP address to be deleted. IMO A is the preferred approach because it preserves the existing behavior, but I'm open to arguments in support of option B.
adam commented 2025-12-29 18:34:53 +01:00
Author
Owner
Copy Link

@sdktr commented on GitHub (Jan 11, 2021):

I opt for option A as well. Option B would be prefered if this method supported a confirmation flag. If a user action is confronted with a PROTECT such as this one, it would imo be user friendly to warn, but allow for an additional confirmation that allows for the delete anyway. If this would happen option A (signaling a change on the parent device/VM) would still need to be implemented?

@sdktr commented on GitHub (Jan 11, 2021): I opt for option A as well. Option B would be prefered if this method supported a confirmation flag. If a user action is confronted with a PROTECT such as this one, it would imo be user friendly to warn, but allow for an additional confirmation that allows for the delete anyway. If this would happen option A (signaling a change on the parent device/VM) would still need to be implemented?
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: accepted type: bug
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#4334
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?