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

Hide "VRF" column when browsing addresses under IP prefix #691

New Issue
Closed
opened 2025-12-29 16:24:50 +01:00 by adam · 2 comments
adam commented 2025-12-29 16:24:50 +01:00
Owner
Copy Link

Originally created by @candlerb on GitHub (Feb 6, 2017).

Minor suggestion for improvement:

When you are browsing the IP addresses within a prefix, there is no need to show the "VRF" column, because all the addresses by definition belong to the VRF of the prefix.

For example, say:

  • prefix id 44 is 192.168.5.0/24 VRF 'Global'
  • prefix id 69 is 192.168.5.0/24 VRF 'Test'

When you are browsing the IP addresses within these prefixes, you are browsing:

  • /ipam/prefixes/44/ip-addresses/
  • /ipam/prefixes/69/ip-addresses/

The first link shows only addresses within 'Global', while the second only shows addresses within 'Test', so the 'VRF' is implied.

Originally created by @candlerb on GitHub (Feb 6, 2017). Minor suggestion for improvement: When you are browsing the IP addresses within a prefix, there is no need to show the "VRF" column, because all the addresses by definition belong to the VRF of the prefix. For example, say: * prefix id 44 is 192.168.5.0/24 VRF 'Global' * prefix id 69 is 192.168.5.0/24 VRF 'Test' When you are browsing the IP addresses within these prefixes, you are browsing: * `/ipam/prefixes/44/ip-addresses/` * `/ipam/prefixes/69/ip-addresses/` The first link shows only addresses within 'Global', while the second only shows addresses within 'Test', so the 'VRF' is implied.
adam added the type: feature label 2025-12-29 16:24:50 +01:00
adam closed this issue 2025-12-29 16:24:50 +01:00
adam commented 2025-12-29 16:24:50 +01:00
Author
Owner
Copy Link

@jeremystretch commented on GitHub (Feb 10, 2017):

If we exclude the VRF column, the VRF is not mentioned anywhere on the page. The user would need to navigate back to the parent prefix view to confirm its VRF. Additionally, we're not pressed for horizontal space in the table. I don't see any reason to exclude it.

@jeremystretch commented on GitHub (Feb 10, 2017): If we exclude the VRF column, the VRF is not mentioned anywhere on the page. The user would need to navigate back to the parent prefix view to confirm its VRF. Additionally, we're not pressed for horizontal space in the table. I don't see any reason to exclude it.
adam commented 2025-12-29 16:24:50 +01:00
Author
Owner
Copy Link

@candlerb commented on GitHub (Feb 10, 2017):

If we exclude the VRF column, the VRF is not mentioned anywhere on the page

When viewing a prefix, it's in the breadcrumbs:

image

But agreed it's not very visible.

I think it would be a good idea for the VRF to be displayed as part of the prefix label (i.e. the h1 in big black letters).

image

Otherwise, if you have overlapping addresses with VRFs, it's very easy to be looking at a prefix and not realise which one it is.

Additionally, we're not pressed for horizontal space in the table.

Fair enough.

I did think it was unnecessary duplication. However I subsequently found there is one case where it's not:

  • You're looking at a prefix in the global VRF
  • You're looking at child prefixes (not child addresses)

In this particular case, netbox shows child prefixes in all VRFs, not just the global one. So the VRF column is required there. And it's needed there, it may as well be consistently everywhere, even if not required in the other cases.

@candlerb commented on GitHub (Feb 10, 2017): > If we exclude the VRF column, the VRF is not mentioned anywhere on the page When viewing a prefix, it's in the breadcrumbs: ![image](https://cloud.githubusercontent.com/assets/44789/22819565/9c0d6f90-ef6a-11e6-9912-36e210dd2335.png) But agreed it's not very visible. I think it would be a good idea for the VRF to be displayed as part of the prefix label (i.e. the h1 in big black letters). ![image](https://cloud.githubusercontent.com/assets/44789/22819706/3d8dab64-ef6b-11e6-8e6b-0fc37a64b189.png) Otherwise, if you have overlapping addresses with VRFs, it's very easy to be looking at a prefix and not realise which one it is. > Additionally, we're not pressed for horizontal space in the table. Fair enough. I did think it was unnecessary duplication. However I subsequently found there is one case where it's not: * You're looking at a *prefix* in the *global* VRF * You're looking at *child prefixes* (not child addresses) In this particular case, netbox shows child prefixes in all VRFs, not just the global one. So the VRF column is required there. And it's needed there, it may as well be consistently everywhere, even if not required in the other cases.
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#691
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?