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

Tracing cables which fork into multiple paths #5440

New Issue
Closed
opened 2025-12-29 19:28:02 +01:00 by adam · 5 comments
adam commented 2025-12-29 19:28:02 +01:00
Owner
Copy Link

Originally created by @dssdss on GitHub (Sep 29, 2021).

NetBox version

v3.0.3

Python version

3.9

Steps to Reproduce

Steps to reproduce netbox installation:
docker-compose pull
docker-compose up -d

Some of our fiber mediaconverters have one Gigabit ethernet port and two fiber ports - RX and TX.
image

So, I've emulated this type of mediaconverter as a path panel (due to your advice in https://github.com/netbox-community/netbox/issues/3442#issuecomment-523571625 I've connected rear ge1 port with 2 fron ports - rx and tx):
image

Expected Behavior

.

Observed Behavior

But when I call Cable Tracing from my switch interface, I've got message: "Path split!"
image

Is it bug, or I am doing something wrong? Due to https://github.com/netbox-community/netbox/issues/2633 the same situation was fixed...

Originally created by @dssdss on GitHub (Sep 29, 2021). ### NetBox version v3.0.3 ### Python version 3.9 ### Steps to Reproduce Steps to reproduce netbox installation: docker-compose pull docker-compose up -d Some of our fiber mediaconverters have one Gigabit ethernet port and two fiber ports - RX and TX. ![image](https://user-images.githubusercontent.com/14805815/135276010-b2b0e251-7359-4a65-b84a-f58cd72a71fc.png) So, I've emulated this type of mediaconverter as a path panel (due to your advice in https://github.com/netbox-community/netbox/issues/3442#issuecomment-523571625 I've connected rear ge1 port with 2 fron ports - rx and tx): ![image](https://user-images.githubusercontent.com/14805815/135277267-32ad2603-3107-46e4-91b2-fe38d580dc0b.png) ### Expected Behavior . ### Observed Behavior But when I call Cable Tracing from my switch interface, I've got message: "Path split!" ![image](https://user-images.githubusercontent.com/14805815/135277965-f968043a-5232-4024-a581-3a77d0834a62.png) Is it bug, or I am doing something wrong? Due to https://github.com/netbox-community/netbox/issues/2633 the same situation was fixed...
adam closed this issue 2025-12-29 19:28:02 +01:00
adam commented 2025-12-29 19:28:03 +01:00
Author
Owner
Copy Link

@jeremystretch commented on GitHub (Sep 29, 2021):

Is it bug, or I am doing something wrong?

It's not a bug; what you've done with splitting out the Tx and Rx cables into separate paths isn't supported. You've told NetBox to trace from a single cable through a point where it's mapped to two separate cables, so the path split is expected.

You can fix this by modeling each step along the path as a single cable.

Steps to reproduce netbox installation:
docker-compose pull
docker-compose up -d

For future reference, this is not sufficient detail for a bug report.

@jeremystretch commented on GitHub (Sep 29, 2021): > Is it bug, or I am doing something wrong? It's not a bug; what you've done with splitting out the Tx and Rx cables into separate paths isn't supported. You've told NetBox to trace from a single cable through a point where it's mapped to two separate cables, so the path split is expected. You can fix this by modeling each step along the path as a single cable. > Steps to reproduce netbox installation: > docker-compose pull > docker-compose up -d For future reference, this is not sufficient detail for a bug report.
adam commented 2025-12-29 19:28:03 +01:00
Author
Owner
Copy Link

@DanSheps commented on GitHub (Sep 29, 2021):

Due to #2633 the same situation was fixed

Unfortunately this work had to be reverted (through a complete rewrite) due to the complexity of the cable trace logic

@DanSheps commented on GitHub (Sep 29, 2021): > Due to #2633 the same situation was fixed Unfortunately this work had to be reverted (through a complete rewrite) due to the complexity of the cable trace logic
adam commented 2025-12-29 19:28:03 +01:00
Author
Owner
Copy Link

@dssdss commented on GitHub (Sep 29, 2021):

Its a pity.... It would be great, if you'll can implement this feature. Such types of equipment are often found in the real world...

@dssdss commented on GitHub (Sep 29, 2021): Its a pity.... It would be great, if you'll can implement this feature. Such types of equipment are often found in the real world...
adam commented 2025-12-29 19:28:03 +01:00
Author
Owner
Copy Link

@jeremystretch commented on GitHub (Sep 29, 2021):

Yes, and they can be accurately modeled in NetBox by using a single cable as I suggested.

@jeremystretch commented on GitHub (Sep 29, 2021): Yes, and they can be accurately modeled in NetBox by using a single cable as I suggested.
adam commented 2025-12-29 19:28:04 +01:00
Author
Owner
Copy Link

@dssdss commented on GitHub (Sep 29, 2021):

Yes, bit it still don't work when I press rx or tx interface on the "Cable trace for Interface GE12", I've got this:
image

All connections are presents:
image

And I've got the same result when I call the Trace from the front ports view of my mediaconverter:
image

@dssdss commented on GitHub (Sep 29, 2021): Yes, bit it still don't work when I press rx or tx interface on the "Cable trace for Interface GE12", I've got this: ![image](https://user-images.githubusercontent.com/14805815/135286776-fc8fae61-d358-4b0d-b84f-a9e2258a19a5.png) All connections are presents: ![image](https://user-images.githubusercontent.com/14805815/135286904-30f2a4ad-3c11-4fdd-9255-117377415390.png) And I've got the same result when I call the Trace from the front ports view of my mediaconverter: ![image](https://user-images.githubusercontent.com/14805815/135287579-5ffd68ba-2b20-4536-bb50-e17aa2b2cadd.png)
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#5440
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?