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

Add "consumers" to service objects in IPAM #6758

New Issue
Closed
opened 2025-12-29 19:45:06 +01:00 by adam · 4 comments
adam commented 2025-12-29 19:45:06 +01:00
Owner
Copy Link

Originally created by @empusas on GitHub (Aug 2, 2022).

NetBox version

v3.4

Feature type

Change to existing functionality

Proposed functionality

I was struggling with the IPAM/Services for a while. But meanwhile i think it is really useful. You can get the data from FW logs, via ansible/netstat or from nmap/nessus scans.
I think what would be a really useful addition would be to add a "consumer" list field to the service object.
That way we could also track who is using this service, at least what IP addresses.

Use case

Quite often there is a demand to identify the affected services or accounts if a system goes down(for maintenance or other reasons).
There are a few commercial products who try to address this, like a module for Service Now.
I think there are many use cases, from my experience quite often FW logs and other data sources get analyzed to figure out the communication relations between IT systems. Also from my experience this is often done only in case of actual need, not proactively and also often not stored/updated anywhere.

Database changes

There are two viable options to enhance the service object.

  1. Would be to create a ManyToMany relation with IP addresses. That would require that all sources that use the service are created in Netbox. An automation to populate the "consumers" list would have to handle that a unknown source will be created.
  2. PostgreSQL offers the Array field. That would allow to store a list of IP addresses/hostnames in String format.

External dependencies

No response

Originally created by @empusas on GitHub (Aug 2, 2022). ### NetBox version v3.4 ### Feature type Change to existing functionality ### Proposed functionality I was struggling with the IPAM/Services for a while. But meanwhile i think it is really useful. You can get the data from FW logs, via ansible/netstat or from nmap/nessus scans. I think what would be a really useful addition would be to add a "consumer" list field to the service object. That way we could also track who is using this service, at least what IP addresses. ### Use case Quite often there is a demand to identify the affected services or accounts if a system goes down(for maintenance or other reasons). There are a few commercial products who try to address this, like a module for Service Now. I think there are many use cases, from my experience quite often FW logs and other data sources get analyzed to figure out the communication relations between IT systems. Also from my experience this is often done only in case of actual need, not proactively and also often not stored/updated anywhere. ### Database changes There are two viable options to enhance the service object. 1. Would be to create a ManyToMany relation with IP addresses. That would require that all sources that use the service are created in Netbox. An automation to populate the "consumers" list would have to handle that a unknown source will be created. 2. PostgreSQL offers the Array field. That would allow to store a list of IP addresses/hostnames in String format. ### External dependencies _No response_
adam added the type: featureplugin candidate labels 2025-12-29 19:45:06 +01:00
adam closed this issue 2025-12-29 19:45:06 +01:00
adam commented 2025-12-29 19:45:07 +01:00
Author
Owner
Copy Link

@bluikko commented on GitHub (Aug 3, 2022):

I think this feature could open up interesting use cases, such as generating firewall configuration from NetBox data.

@bluikko commented on GitHub (Aug 3, 2022): I think this feature could open up interesting use cases, such as generating firewall configuration from NetBox data.
adam commented 2025-12-29 19:45:07 +01:00
Author
Owner
Copy Link

@empusas commented on GitHub (Aug 3, 2022):

I was more thinking in the other direction, to document what is going on in a brownfield environments. I did many data center migrations in my career and there was never a reliable documentation about the communication between systems.
I assume that many migrate to cloud now and have the same problem.
Then such documentation could indeed be used to create new firewall rules in the target environment and check routing etc.

@empusas commented on GitHub (Aug 3, 2022): I was more thinking in the other direction, to document what is going on in a brownfield environments. I did many data center migrations in my career and there was never a reliable documentation about the communication between systems. I assume that many migrate to cloud now and have the same problem. Then such documentation could indeed be used to create new firewall rules in the target environment and check routing etc.
adam commented 2025-12-29 19:45:08 +01:00
Author
Owner
Copy Link

@bluikko commented on GitHub (Aug 5, 2022):

It seems that Nautobot has implemented this (and the firewall config side of it). They seem to have a plug-in "application dictionary" that implements all of it. I wonder if any of that is usable, or they have some restrictive license on it.

@bluikko commented on GitHub (Aug 5, 2022): It seems that Nautobot has implemented this (and the firewall config side of it). They seem to have a plug-in "application dictionary" that implements all of it. I wonder if any of that is usable, or they have some restrictive license on it.
adam commented 2025-12-29 19:45:08 +01:00
Author
Owner
Copy Link

@jeremystretch commented on GitHub (Aug 30, 2022):

This sounds like the sort of thing that would best be implemented as a plugin. Maybe you'd be interested in developing something as a proof of concept. As a core feature though I'm afraid this is far too vague for us to take on.

@jeremystretch commented on GitHub (Aug 30, 2022): This sounds like the sort of thing that would best be implemented as a plugin. Maybe you'd be interested in developing something as a proof of concept. As a core feature though I'm afraid this is far too vague for us to take on.
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 plugin candidate 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#6758
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?