Allow Multiple Sites per Prefix #5102

Closed
opened 2025-12-29 19:24:14 +01:00 by adam · 2 comments
Owner

Originally created by @firstkevinds on GitHub (Jul 26, 2021).

NetBox version

v2.11.9

Feature type

Data model extension

Proposed functionality

Add the ability to assign a multiple sites to a prefix.

Use case

Prefixes can be used across current boundaries, an example is PtP links.

Prefix - 192.0.2.32/30
SiteA - 192.0.2.33/30
SiteB - 192.0.2.34/30

Prefix - 192.0.2.36/30
SiteA - 192.0.2.37/30
SiteC - 192.0.2.38/30

SiteA - 198.51.100.0/24
SiteB - 203.0.113.0/24

SiteA's router routes traffic for 203.0.113.0/24 to 192.0.2.34. SiteB's router routes traffic for 198.51.100.0/24 to 192.0.2.33.

The prefix is used at both SiteA and SiteB, so should be able to document it.

Database changes

Not sure on this one.. More UI interface allowing the field multiple times and displaying it when looking at the UI or reports for either 'site'.

External dependencies

No response

Originally created by @firstkevinds on GitHub (Jul 26, 2021). ### NetBox version v2.11.9 ### Feature type Data model extension ### Proposed functionality Add the ability to assign a multiple sites to a prefix. ### Use case Prefixes can be used across current boundaries, an example is PtP links. Prefix - 192.0.2.32/30 SiteA - 192.0.2.33/30 SiteB - 192.0.2.34/30 Prefix - 192.0.2.36/30 SiteA - 192.0.2.37/30 SiteC - 192.0.2.38/30 SiteA - 198.51.100.0/24 SiteB - 203.0.113.0/24 SiteA's router routes traffic for 203.0.113.0/24 to 192.0.2.34. SiteB's router routes traffic for 198.51.100.0/24 to 192.0.2.33. The prefix is used at both SiteA and SiteB, so should be able to document it. ### Database changes Not sure on this one.. More UI interface allowing the field multiple times and displaying it when looking at the UI or reports for either 'site'. ### External dependencies _No response_
adam added the type: feature label 2025-12-29 19:24:14 +01:00
adam closed this issue 2025-12-29 19:24:14 +01:00
Author
Owner

@jeremystretch commented on GitHub (Jul 26, 2021):

Seems like this would be covered by #6414. What do you think?

@jeremystretch commented on GitHub (Jul 26, 2021): Seems like this would be covered by #6414. What do you think?
Author
Owner

@firstkevinds commented on GitHub (Jul 26, 2021):

Seems like this would be covered by #6414. What do you think?

Similar yes, sorry I missed that with my searching... I started by trying to figure out how NetBox wanted me to document it.

From I am not convinced that a site-group is the best way.. If someone does a mesh, every combination of sites may need to be created.

@firstkevinds commented on GitHub (Jul 26, 2021): > > > Seems like this would be covered by #6414. What do you think? Similar yes, sorry I missed that with my searching... I started by trying to figure out how NetBox wanted me to document it. From [](https://github.com/netbox-community/netbox/issues/6414) I am not convinced that a site-group is the best way.. If someone does a mesh, every combination of sites may need to be created.
Sign in to join this conversation.
1 Participants
Notifications
Due Date
No due date set.
Dependencies

No dependencies set.

Reference: starred/netbox#5102