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

Request for interface type 100base-x SFP #6004

New Issue
Closed
opened 2025-12-29 19:35:37 +01:00 by adam · 7 comments
adam commented 2025-12-29 19:35:37 +01:00
Owner
Copy Link

Originally created by @Pakkec on GitHub (Jan 27, 2022).

NetBox version

3.1.6

Feature type

Change to existing functionality

Proposed functionality

Hi, would it be possible to add the 100base-x-sfp Fastethernet interface type into netbox/dcim/choices.py ?

Code example:

class InterfaceTypeChoices(ChoiceSet):
# Ethernet
TYPE_100FE_SFP = '100base-x-sfp'

CHOICES = (
'Ethernet (modular)',
(
(TYPE_100FE_SFP, 'SFP (100FE)'),
)

Use case

These are used quite a lot in FTTx environments for example.

Database changes

Probably not.

External dependencies

None.

Originally created by @Pakkec on GitHub (Jan 27, 2022). ### NetBox version 3.1.6 ### Feature type Change to existing functionality ### Proposed functionality Hi, would it be possible to add the 100base-x-sfp Fastethernet interface type into netbox/dcim/choices.py ? Code example: class InterfaceTypeChoices(ChoiceSet): # Ethernet TYPE_100FE_SFP = '100base-x-sfp' CHOICES = ( 'Ethernet (modular)', ( (TYPE_100FE_SFP, 'SFP (100FE)'), ) ### Use case These are used quite a lot in FTTx environments for example. ### Database changes Probably not. ### External dependencies None.
adam added the type: feature label 2025-12-29 19:35:37 +01:00
adam closed this issue 2025-12-29 19:35:38 +01:00
adam commented 2025-12-29 19:35:38 +01:00
Author
Owner
Copy Link

@DanSheps commented on GitHub (Jan 28, 2022):

Thank you for submitting your idea. Unfortunately, the proposed feature falls outside the scope of functionality that NetBox aims to provide. As NetBox is an open source application with limited development resources and a persistent backlog of existing work, it is crucial that we limit the scope of development to ensure it remains a maintainable project for many years to come. Thank you for your understanding.

More information:

We don't add SFP's, we add the SFP interface (SFP, SFP+, QSFP, etc).

@DanSheps commented on GitHub (Jan 28, 2022): Thank you for submitting your idea. Unfortunately, the proposed feature falls outside the scope of functionality that NetBox aims to provide. As NetBox is an open source application with limited development resources and a persistent backlog of existing work, it is crucial that we limit the scope of development to ensure it remains a maintainable project for many years to come. Thank you for your understanding. More information: We don't add SFP's, we add the SFP interface (SFP, SFP+, QSFP, etc).
adam commented 2025-12-29 19:35:38 +01:00
Author
Owner
Copy Link

@apellini commented on GitHub (Jan 28, 2022):

Sorry. But currently on Netbox we could insert only Base T fixed interface, but there is the possibility to have an SFP based interface. Also this one is not a big change on the code and it could be helpful to maintain clear the data.

@apellini commented on GitHub (Jan 28, 2022): Sorry. But currently on Netbox we could insert only Base T fixed interface, but there is the possibility to have an SFP based interface. Also this one is not a big change on the code and it could be helpful to maintain clear the data.
adam commented 2025-12-29 19:35:38 +01:00
Author
Owner
Copy Link

@DanSheps commented on GitHub (Jan 28, 2022):

You should choose SFP (1G) as the SFP is a 1G SFP, the pluggable you are inserting is 100m.

In 3.2, there will be a configurable speed/duplex option.

@DanSheps commented on GitHub (Jan 28, 2022): You should choose SFP (1G) as the SFP is a 1G SFP, the pluggable you are inserting is 100m. In 3.2, there will be a configurable speed/duplex option.
adam commented 2025-12-29 19:35:38 +01:00
Author
Owner
Copy Link

@apellini commented on GitHub (Jan 28, 2022):

But 1G base X interface (SFP) haven't autonegotiation and also 1G Base X (SX, LX) are fixed to 1G.

@apellini commented on GitHub (Jan 28, 2022): But 1G base X interface (SFP) haven't autonegotiation and also 1G Base X (SX, LX) are fixed to 1G.
adam commented 2025-12-29 19:35:39 +01:00
Author
Owner
Copy Link

@apellini commented on GitHub (Jan 28, 2022):

I add this for reference:

https://www.cisco.com/c/en/us/products/collateral/interfaces-modules/gigabit-ethernet-gbic-sfp-modules/datasheet-c78-366584.html

https://www.juniper.net/documentation/en_US/release-independent/junos/topics/reference/specifications/transceiver-m-mx-t-series-1000base-optical-specifications.pdf (only 1G Base T is autosense)

@apellini commented on GitHub (Jan 28, 2022): I add this for reference: https://www.cisco.com/c/en/us/products/collateral/interfaces-modules/gigabit-ethernet-gbic-sfp-modules/datasheet-c78-366584.html https://www.juniper.net/documentation/en_US/release-independent/junos/topics/reference/specifications/transceiver-m-mx-t-series-1000base-optical-specifications.pdf (only 1G Base T is autosense)
adam commented 2025-12-29 19:35:39 +01:00
Author
Owner
Copy Link

@DanSheps commented on GitHub (Jan 29, 2022):

Yes, but we aren't tracking SFPs, we are tracking physical interfaces, which are the SFP interface

@DanSheps commented on GitHub (Jan 29, 2022): Yes, but we aren't tracking SFPs, we are tracking physical interfaces, which are the SFP interface
adam commented 2025-12-29 19:35:39 +01:00
Author
Owner
Copy Link

@Pakkec commented on GitHub (Jan 30, 2022):

Thank you for the input! Now I understand much better the scope of Netbox and more specific the physical interface approach. The usage of a "100Mbit/s SPF" physical interface does appear but mostly in legacy equipment.
Thanks for a great product anyway. Its very useful :-)

@Pakkec commented on GitHub (Jan 30, 2022): Thank you for the input! Now I understand much better the scope of Netbox and more specific the physical interface approach. The usage of a "100Mbit/s SPF" physical interface does appear but mostly in legacy equipment. Thanks for a great product anyway. Its very useful :-)
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#6004
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?