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

link 'assigned' checkbox to device rather than ip #7083

New Issue
Closed
opened 2025-12-29 20:18:59 +01:00 by adam · 4 comments
adam commented 2025-12-29 20:18:59 +01:00
Owner
Copy Link

Originally created by @PieterL75 on GitHub (Oct 6, 2022).

Originally assigned to: @cpund on GitHub.

NetBox version

v3.3.5

Feature type

Change to existing functionality

Proposed functionality

When searching for an IP, the result shows the 'assigned' green checkbox if an IP address is assigned to a device/vm/...
The current link of the green check is to the IP address object.
I like to propose to change that to the device/vm/... the IP is assigned to.

Use case

When the checkbox is clicked, it is more intuitive to go to the device it is assigned to.
Now it requires 2 additional clicks to go to the device.

Database changes

No response

External dependencies

No response

Originally created by @PieterL75 on GitHub (Oct 6, 2022). Originally assigned to: @cpund on GitHub. ### NetBox version v3.3.5 ### Feature type Change to existing functionality ### Proposed functionality When searching for an IP, the result shows the 'assigned' green checkbox if an IP address is assigned to a device/vm/... The current link of the green check is to the IP address object. I like to propose to change that to the device/vm/... the IP is assigned to. ### Use case When the checkbox is clicked, it is more intuitive to go to the device it is assigned to. Now it requires 2 additional clicks to go to the device. ### Database changes _No response_ ### External dependencies _No response_
adam added the status: acceptedtype: feature labels 2025-12-29 20:18:59 +01:00
adam closed this issue 2025-12-29 20:19:00 +01:00
adam commented 2025-12-29 20:19:00 +01:00
Author
Owner
Copy Link

@cpund commented on GitHub (Oct 6, 2022):

@jeremystretch I can work on implementing this

@cpund commented on GitHub (Oct 6, 2022): @jeremystretch I can work on implementing this
adam commented 2025-12-29 20:19:01 +01:00
Author
Owner
Copy Link

@cpund commented on GitHub (Oct 16, 2022):

Got around to digging into the code and familiarizing myself with this portion. I see that there are already two columns (that are just hidden by default) that show both A. the device, and B. the interface.

I do agree that clicking the checkmark to go to the device would be more intuitive, however is it more intuitive to send the user to the device, or the interface? Or perhaps, a third solution: if the IP is listed as the primary IP of a device, send them to a device, otherwise send them to the interface? Thoughts?

@cpund commented on GitHub (Oct 16, 2022): Got around to digging into the code and familiarizing myself with this portion. I see that there are already two columns (that are just hidden by default) that show both A. the device, and B. the interface. I do agree that clicking the checkmark to go to the device would be more intuitive, however is it more intuitive to send the user to the device, or the interface? Or perhaps, a third solution: if the IP is listed as the primary IP of a device, send them to a device, otherwise send them to the interface? Thoughts?
adam commented 2025-12-29 20:19:01 +01:00
Author
Owner
Copy Link

@PieterL75 commented on GitHub (Oct 16, 2022):

The checkbox is very slim. The device or interface table makes the table wider.
To be honest, the interface view has less added value than then device view. I don't see a reason to link it to the interface.

Maybe we can link it to the interface tab of the device?

@PieterL75 commented on GitHub (Oct 16, 2022): The checkbox is very slim. The device or interface table makes the table wider. To be honest, the interface view has less added value than then device view. I don't see a reason to link it to the interface. Maybe we can link it to the interface tab of the device?
adam commented 2025-12-29 20:19:01 +01:00
Author
Owner
Copy Link

@jeremystretch commented on GitHub (Oct 18, 2022):

IMO linking to the interface is preferable, but I don't have a strong opinion.

@jeremystretch commented on GitHub (Oct 18, 2022): IMO linking to the interface is preferable, but I don't have a strong opinion.
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#7083
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?