starred/netbox
1
0
Fork 0
mirror of https://github.com/netbox-community/netbox.git synced 2026-03-02 12:30:06 +01:00
Code Issues 273 Packages Projects Releases 10 Wiki Activity

NAPALM LLDP Checks #4844

New Issue
Closed
opened 2025-12-29 19:21:12 +01:00 by adam · 3 comments
adam commented 2025-12-29 19:21:12 +01:00
Owner
Copy Link

Originally created by @ryanmerolle on GitHub (Apr 29, 2021).

NetBox version

v2.11.2

Feature type

Change to existing functionality

Proposed functionality

Currently the NAPALM based LLDP function in the device page attempts to audit the configured intent vs what NAPALM sees. It checks that the LLDP info matches the remote device and interface connected.

With connections that traverse circuits and other hops between 2 NetBox managed IP devices, the NAPALM LLDP status shows that the interface's associated row in the displayed table is blue even when the LLDP info matches the opposite end of the connection.

This really only matters with the below scenario when LLDP is traversing the circuit.

device-A/interface-A <---circuit-termination-a ---><---circuit ---><---circuit-termination-b --->interface-B/device-B

The associated table and logic that is generated for the LLDP table shows:

Interface Configured Device Configured Interface LLDP Device LLDP Interface
interface-A circuit device-B interface-B

I suggest we if the connection is not a dcim.interface to dcim.interface, the remote end dcim.interface be used to check vs LLDP.

Use case

This is just a nice to have and not a high priority item. With the recent cable trace logic that was redone. It may not be that challenging to do this logic.

Database changes

None

External dependencies

NAPALM is of course used to grab the LLDP info, but would not need to be tweaked at all.

Originally created by @ryanmerolle on GitHub (Apr 29, 2021). ### NetBox version v2.11.2 ### Feature type Change to existing functionality ### Proposed functionality Currently the NAPALM based LLDP function in the device page attempts to audit the configured intent vs what NAPALM sees. It checks that the LLDP info matches the remote device and interface connected. With connections that traverse circuits and other hops between 2 NetBox managed IP devices, the NAPALM LLDP status shows that the interface's associated row in the displayed table is blue even when the LLDP info matches the opposite end of the connection. This really only matters with the below scenario when LLDP is traversing the circuit. **device-A/interface-A** <---circuit-termination-a ---><---circuit ---><---circuit-termination-b --->**interface-B/device-B** The associated table and logic that is generated for the LLDP table shows: Interface | Configured Device | Configured Interface | LLDP Device | LLDP Interface ----------- | ----------- | ----------- | ----------- | ----------- interface-A | circuit | | device-B | interface-B I suggest we if the connection is not a dcim.interface to dcim.interface, the remote end dcim.interface be used to check vs LLDP. ### Use case This is just a nice to have and not a high priority item. With the recent cable trace logic that was redone. It may not be that challenging to do this logic. ### Database changes None ### External dependencies NAPALM is of course used to grab the LLDP info, but would not need to be tweaked at all.
adam added the type: featurestatus: needs ownerpending closure labels 2025-12-29 19:21:12 +01:00
adam closed this issue 2025-12-29 19:21:12 +01:00
adam commented 2025-12-29 19:21:12 +01:00
Author
Owner
Copy Link

@github-actions[bot] commented on GitHub (Jun 28, 2021):

This issue has been automatically marked as stale because it has not had recent activity. It will be closed if no further activity occurs. NetBox is governed by a small group of core maintainers which means not all opened issues may receive direct feedback. Please see our contributing guide.

@github-actions[bot] commented on GitHub (Jun 28, 2021): This issue has been automatically marked as stale because it has not had recent activity. It will be closed if no further activity occurs. NetBox is governed by a small group of core maintainers which means not all opened issues may receive direct feedback. Please see our [contributing guide](https://github.com/netbox-community/netbox/blob/develop/CONTRIBUTING.md).
adam commented 2025-12-29 19:21:13 +01:00
Author
Owner
Copy Link

@github-actions[bot] commented on GitHub (Sep 22, 2021):

This issue has been automatically marked as stale because it has not had recent activity. It will be closed if no further activity occurs. NetBox is governed by a small group of core maintainers which means not all opened issues may receive direct feedback. Please see our contributing guide.

@github-actions[bot] commented on GitHub (Sep 22, 2021): This issue has been automatically marked as stale because it has not had recent activity. It will be closed if no further activity occurs. NetBox is governed by a small group of core maintainers which means not all opened issues may receive direct feedback. Please see our [contributing guide](https://github.com/netbox-community/netbox/blob/develop/CONTRIBUTING.md).
adam commented 2025-12-29 19:21:13 +01:00
Author
Owner
Copy Link

@github-actions[bot] commented on GitHub (Oct 23, 2021):

This issue has been automatically closed due to lack of activity. In an effort to reduce noise, please do not comment any further. Note that the core maintainers may elect to reopen this issue at a later date if deemed necessary.

@github-actions[bot] commented on GitHub (Oct 23, 2021): This issue has been automatically closed due to lack of activity. In an effort to reduce noise, please do not comment any further. Note that the core maintainers may elect to reopen this issue at a later date if deemed necessary.
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 pending closure status: needs owner type: feature
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#4844
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?