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 new interface and cable types to model direct interface connections to backplanes #6978

New Issue
Closed
opened 2025-12-29 19:47:23 +01:00 by adam · 8 comments
adam commented 2025-12-29 19:47:23 +01:00
Owner
Copy Link

Originally created by @phurrelmann on GitHub (Sep 13, 2022).

Originally assigned to: @phurrelmann on GitHub.

NetBox version

v3.3.0

Feature type

New functionality

Proposed functionality

Blades (and router/switch modules) often provide network connections via direct physical connections on their backplane. The interface then is directly wired over the backplane. There are proper IEEE standards defined for 1G (1000BASE-KX, see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gigabit_Ethernet), for 10G (10GBASE-KX4 and 10GBASE-KR, see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/10_Gigabit_Ethernet#10GBASE-KR), for 40G and 100G (40GBASE-KR4, 100GBASE-KP4, 100GBASE-KR2 and 100GBASE-KR4, see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/100_Gigabit_Ethernet).

To model and trace backplane network interfaces I'd also like to add the generic cable type "Backplane" to document, that the cable is indeed a direct physical copper connection.

Summary:

  1. Add new cable type "Backplane" to section of copper cables
  2. Add new interface types to section "Ethernet (fixed)"

Interface types to be added:

  • 1000BASE-KX
  • 10GBASE-KR
  • 10GBASE-KX4
  • 40GBASE-KR4
  • 100GBASE-KP4
  • 100GBASE-KR2
  • 100GBASE-KR4

If accepted I'll try to add/implement those new interface and cable type myself and submit a PR.

Use case

Model physical interfaces connected directly to a backplane and make this visible with the correct cable of type "Backplane".
We have lots of bladecenters and blades where the interfaces of blades blade are directly wired to the backplane. Currenlty this physical connection can't be properly modeled and its not visible for the users that the cable is indeed a backplane connection.

This feature could also be handy when using the new modules feature in combination with modular switches where some internal interfaces are realized with direct backplane connectivity.

Database changes

none, only new interface and cable type definitions are needed.

External dependencies

none

Originally created by @phurrelmann on GitHub (Sep 13, 2022). Originally assigned to: @phurrelmann on GitHub. ### NetBox version v3.3.0 ### Feature type New functionality ### Proposed functionality Blades (and router/switch modules) often provide network connections via direct physical connections on their backplane. The interface then is directly wired over the backplane. There are proper IEEE standards defined for 1G (1000BASE-KX, see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gigabit_Ethernet), for 10G (10GBASE-KX4 and 10GBASE-KR, see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/10_Gigabit_Ethernet#10GBASE-KR), for 40G and 100G (40GBASE-KR4, 100GBASE-KP4, 100GBASE-KR2 and 100GBASE-KR4, see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/100_Gigabit_Ethernet). To model and trace backplane network interfaces I'd also like to add the generic cable type "Backplane" to document, that the cable is indeed a direct physical copper connection. **Summary:** 1. Add new cable type "Backplane" to section of copper cables 2. Add new interface types to section "Ethernet (fixed)" Interface types to be added: - 1000BASE-KX - 10GBASE-KR - 10GBASE-KX4 - 40GBASE-KR4 - 100GBASE-KP4 - 100GBASE-KR2 - 100GBASE-KR4 If accepted I'll try to add/implement those new interface and cable type myself and submit a PR. ### Use case Model physical interfaces connected directly to a backplane and make this visible with the correct cable of type "Backplane". We have lots of bladecenters and blades where the interfaces of blades blade are directly wired to the backplane. Currenlty this physical connection can't be properly modeled and its not visible for the users that the cable is indeed a backplane connection. This feature could also be handy when using the new modules feature in combination with modular switches where some internal interfaces are realized with direct backplane connectivity. ### Database changes none, only new interface and cable type definitions are needed. ### External dependencies none
adam added the status: acceptedtype: feature labels 2025-12-29 19:47:23 +01:00
adam closed this issue 2025-12-29 19:47:24 +01:00
adam commented 2025-12-29 19:47:24 +01:00
Author
Owner
Copy Link

@phurrelmann commented on GitHub (Sep 13, 2022):

To not clutter the interface type section "Ethernet (fixed)" a new section "Backplane" or "Ethernet (Backplane)" could be added, too. But I'll leave this open for discussion.

@phurrelmann commented on GitHub (Sep 13, 2022): To not clutter the interface type section "Ethernet (fixed)" a new section "Backplane" or "Ethernet (Backplane)" could be added, too. But I'll leave this open for discussion.
adam commented 2025-12-29 19:47:24 +01:00
Author
Owner
Copy Link

@jeremystretch commented on GitHub (Sep 13, 2022):

Backplane Ethernet, also known by the name of the task force that developed it, 802.3ap, is used in backplane applications such as blade servers and modular network equipment with upgradable line cards.

Would it make sense to refer to these as 802.3ap types?

@jeremystretch commented on GitHub (Sep 13, 2022): > Backplane Ethernet, also known by the name of the task force that developed it, 802.3ap, is used in [backplane](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Backplane) applications such as [blade servers](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blade_servers) and [modular](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Modular#Modularity_in_technology_and_management) network equipment with upgradable [line cards](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Line_card). Would it make sense to refer to these as 802.3ap types?
adam commented 2025-12-29 19:47:24 +01:00
Author
Owner
Copy Link

@phurrelmann commented on GitHub (Sep 13, 2022):

you mean to group those new interfaces types under "Backplane (802.3ap)" or do you mean to merge all interface types to a single "802.3ap" type?If yes, I'd vote for the former and not for the latter

@phurrelmann commented on GitHub (Sep 13, 2022): you mean to group those new interfaces types under "Backplane (802.3ap)" or do you mean to merge all interface types to a single "802.3ap" type?If yes, I'd vote for the former and not for the latter
adam commented 2025-12-29 19:47:24 +01:00
Author
Owner
Copy Link

@jeremystretch commented on GitHub (Sep 13, 2022):

Sorry, yes, I was referring to the group. We could maybe call it "Backplane (802.3ap)" to better differentiate from the general Ethernet types.

@jeremystretch commented on GitHub (Sep 13, 2022): Sorry, yes, I was referring to the group. We could maybe call it "Backplane (802.3ap)" to better differentiate from the general Ethernet types.
adam commented 2025-12-29 19:47:25 +01:00
Author
Owner
Copy Link

@phurrelmann commented on GitHub (Sep 13, 2022):

Sorry, yes, I was referring to the group. We could maybe call it "Backplane (802.3ap)" to better differentiate from the general Ethernet types.

Sounds good to me 👍
I'll try to implement this ticket, if accepted.

@phurrelmann commented on GitHub (Sep 13, 2022): > Sorry, yes, I was referring to the group. We could maybe call it "Backplane (802.3ap)" to better differentiate from the general Ethernet types. Sounds good to me 👍 I'll try to implement this ticket, if accepted.
adam commented 2025-12-29 19:47:25 +01:00
Author
Owner
Copy Link

@phurrelmann commented on GitHub (Sep 23, 2022):

just a quick update. I'm still interested in implementing this and have planned this for next week

@phurrelmann commented on GitHub (Sep 23, 2022): just a quick update. I'm still interested in implementing this and have planned this for next week
adam commented 2025-12-29 19:47:25 +01:00
Author
Owner
Copy Link

@jeremystretch commented on GitHub (Oct 3, 2022):

@phurrelmann is this ready for a PR?

@jeremystretch commented on GitHub (Oct 3, 2022): @phurrelmann is this ready for a PR?
adam commented 2025-12-29 19:47:26 +01:00
Author
Owner
Copy Link

@phurrelmann commented on GitHub (Oct 3, 2022):

Need to do some checks and will submit the PR tomorrow. Thx for your patience

@phurrelmann commented on GitHub (Oct 3, 2022): Need to do some checks and will submit the PR tomorrow. Thx for your patience
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 status: accepted 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#6978
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?