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

Using Contact Object also in IPAM and Tenants #5787

New Issue
Closed
opened 2025-12-29 19:32:40 +01:00 by adam · 2 comments
adam commented 2025-12-29 19:32:40 +01:00
Owner
Copy Link

Originally created by @jchnbckr on GitHub (Dec 16, 2021).

NetBox version

v3.1.1

Feature type

Data model extension

Proposed functionality

Using the contact object in the same way like rack oder site by tenants, tenantsgroup and by ipam object (ipaddress, ipprefix vlan)

Using the central refence for persons/personsgroups in all modules

Use case

In our university departments have managed and securtiy mangers.
We build the departments as tenant and the top departmentlevel as tenant group

ip subnets and address are organizational bind to persons/groups or departmens/tenants

it will be fine when we can bind a contact object to an tenant (in our case using roles like eg. departmentmanager/professor/securitymanger). these are the same persons in some sites or racks or fopr devices.

The contact objects are still a presend for saving a lot of time, to the current way filling many individual customfield.

for devices and rack I changed it and it works fine and looklikes very nice in the object

Database changes

I does not know, which changes are needed

External dependencies

no external dep

Originally created by @jchnbckr on GitHub (Dec 16, 2021). ### NetBox version v3.1.1 ### Feature type Data model extension ### Proposed functionality Using the contact object in the same way like rack oder site by tenants, tenantsgroup and by ipam object (ipaddress, ipprefix vlan) Using the central refence for persons/personsgroups in all modules ### Use case In our university departments have managed and securtiy mangers. We build the departments as tenant and the top departmentlevel as tenant group ip subnets and address are organizational bind to persons/groups or departmens/tenants it will be fine when we can bind a contact object to an tenant (in our case using roles like eg. departmentmanager/professor/securitymanger). these are the same persons in some sites or racks or fopr devices. The contact objects are still a presend for saving a lot of time, to the current way filling many individual customfield. for devices and rack I changed it and it works fine and looklikes very nice in the object ### Database changes I does not know, which changes are needed ### External dependencies no external dep
adam added the type: feature label 2025-12-29 19:32:40 +01:00
adam closed this issue 2025-12-29 19:32:40 +01:00
adam commented 2025-12-29 19:32:41 +01:00
Author
Owner
Copy Link

@candlerb commented on GitHub (Dec 18, 2021):

it will be fine when we can bind a contact object to an tenant

I don't quite understand that. You can already bind a contact object to a tenant. You can also bind a tenant to a prefix or an IP address.

Are you saying that there are cases that even when a Prefix is bound to a tenant, you also want to bind contacts directly to the Prefix?

@candlerb commented on GitHub (Dec 18, 2021): > it will be fine when we can bind a contact object to an tenant I don't quite understand that. You *can* already bind a contact object to a tenant. You can also bind a tenant to a prefix or an IP address. Are you saying that there are cases that even when a Prefix is bound to a tenant, you also want to bind contacts directly to the Prefix?
adam commented 2025-12-29 19:32:42 +01:00
Author
Owner
Copy Link

@jchnbckr commented on GitHub (Dec 18, 2021):

okay in combination with tenants it works.
I was blind in the tenant object ... searching for contact
everything is fine
close this please

@jchnbckr commented on GitHub (Dec 18, 2021): okay in combination with tenants it works. I was blind in the tenant object ... searching for contact everything is fine close this please
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 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#5787
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?