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

Allow Virtual Machines as Devices in Cluster #6998

New Issue
Closed
opened 2025-12-29 19:47:36 +01:00 by adam · 3 comments
adam commented 2025-12-29 19:47:36 +01:00
Owner
Copy Link

Originally created by @cstueckrath on GitHub (Sep 19, 2022).

NetBox version

v3.3.4

Feature type

Change to existing functionality

Proposed functionality

Curretly clusters can only be formed using physical devices and can only host virtual machines.
It should be possible to create application clusters from virtual machines, too.

  • "Clusters" might move from "Virtualization" to "IPAM"
  • When editing a Cluster: Change "Add Virtual Machine" to "Add Cluster Role" (which can be a Virtual Machine, too)
  • Change "Assign Device" to "Add Node", which can be Virtual machines, too

A workaround, where FHRP-Groups are used for this is not ideal because of the problems mentioned here: https://github.com/netbox-community/netbox/discussions/9515#discussioncomment-2944159

Use case

With this change we could document our SQL Clusters or file clusters as well as other application clusters, too.
Often those clusters are guest clusters, formed from virtual machines as nodes.

Database changes

No response

External dependencies

No response

Originally created by @cstueckrath on GitHub (Sep 19, 2022). ### NetBox version v3.3.4 ### Feature type Change to existing functionality ### Proposed functionality Curretly clusters can only be formed using physical devices and can only host virtual machines. It should be possible to create application clusters from virtual machines, too. * "Clusters" might move from "Virtualization" to "IPAM" * When editing a Cluster: Change "Add Virtual Machine" to "Add Cluster Role" (which can be a Virtual Machine, too) * Change "Assign Device" to "Add Node", which can be Virtual machines, too A workaround, where FHRP-Groups are used for this is not ideal because of the problems mentioned here: https://github.com/netbox-community/netbox/discussions/9515#discussioncomment-2944159 ### Use case With this change we could document our SQL Clusters or file clusters as well as other application clusters, too. Often those clusters are guest clusters, formed from virtual machines as nodes. ### Database changes _No response_ ### External dependencies _No response_
adam added the type: feature label 2025-12-29 19:47:36 +01:00
adam closed this issue 2025-12-29 19:47:36 +01:00
adam commented 2025-12-29 19:47:37 +01:00
Author
Owner
Copy Link

@hagbarddenstore commented on GitHub (Sep 20, 2022):

Clusters are used to document hypervisors, not other kinds of clusters.

For other kinds of clusters, find a plugin or develop a plugin which better documents the specific kind of cluster.

@hagbarddenstore commented on GitHub (Sep 20, 2022): Clusters are used to document hypervisors, not other kinds of clusters. For other kinds of clusters, find a plugin or develop a plugin which better documents the specific kind of cluster.
adam commented 2025-12-29 19:47:37 +01:00
Author
Owner
Copy Link

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

Hence the request for a new feature.
I am aware that clusters are currently only used to document hypervisors. It would still be helpful to have a function to assign VIPs to multiple objects (including VMs) without having to use FHRP Groups to do so.

@cstueckrath commented on GitHub (Sep 23, 2022): Hence the request for a new feature. I am aware that clusters are currently only used to document hypervisors. It would still be helpful to have a function to assign VIPs to multiple objects (including VMs) without having to use FHRP Groups to do so.
adam commented 2025-12-29 19:47:37 +01:00
Author
Owner
Copy Link

@jeremystretch commented on GitHub (Sep 26, 2022):

As @hagbarddenstore points out, the purpose of clusters in NetBox is already very well defined and serves a specific purpose. We won't be changing this. However, you might consider developing a custom plugin that implemented the functionality you desire.

@jeremystretch commented on GitHub (Sep 26, 2022): As @hagbarddenstore points out, the purpose of clusters in NetBox is already very well defined and serves a specific purpose. We won't be changing this. However, you might consider developing a [custom plugin](https://docs.netbox.dev/en/stable/plugins/development/) that implemented the functionality you desire.
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#6998
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?