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 connector type to cables #7141

New Issue
Closed
opened 2025-12-29 20:19:40 +01:00 by adam · 5 comments
adam commented 2025-12-29 20:19:40 +01:00
Owner
Copy Link

Originally created by @jehrhardt-bego on GitHub (Oct 21, 2022).

NetBox version

v3.3.5

Feature type

Change to existing functionality

Proposed functionality

adding a field "connector type" to cables would make it easier to document different types of fiber cables.

I think the most common (at least for us) are
LC/PC
SC/PC
E2000/APC
MPO/A
MPO/B

Use case

With this field users can correctly document cross connects, patch cables and know the correct cable if it needs to be replaced.

Database changes

add a field connector type

External dependencies

none

Originally created by @jehrhardt-bego on GitHub (Oct 21, 2022). ### NetBox version v3.3.5 ### Feature type Change to existing functionality ### Proposed functionality adding a field "connector type" to cables would make it easier to document different types of fiber cables. I think the most common (at least for us) are LC/PC SC/PC E2000/APC MPO/A MPO/B ### Use case With this field users can correctly document cross connects, patch cables and know the correct cable if it needs to be replaced. ### Database changes add a field connector type ### External dependencies none
adam added the type: featurepending closure labels 2025-12-29 20:19:40 +01:00
adam closed this issue 2025-12-29 20:19:41 +01:00
adam commented 2025-12-29 20:19:41 +01:00
Author
Owner
Copy Link

@bluikko commented on GitHub (Oct 24, 2022):

In #10724 you proposed to add SFP/etc. module types. Wouldn't these two kind go together? Since it is the module that defines the connector type (on the host side).
And therein, IMHO, lies one of the major issues with this proposal - you are only thinking about fiber-optic patch cords. But a "cable" in NetBox is much more than that: it is any cable, whether a fiber or copper patch cord, AC or DC power cable, stack cable, serial cable, ...

You might be able to use custom fields to document what you need. I am afraid that to be taken seriously this proposal will need to be massively more fleshed out.

@bluikko commented on GitHub (Oct 24, 2022): In #10724 you proposed to add SFP/etc. module types. Wouldn't these two kind go together? Since it is the module that defines the connector type (on the host side). And therein, IMHO, lies _one_ of the major issues with this proposal - you are only thinking about fiber-optic patch cords. But a "cable" in NetBox is much more than that: it is any cable, whether a fiber or copper patch cord, AC or DC power cable, stack cable, serial cable, ... You might be able to use custom fields to document what you need. I am afraid that to be taken seriously this proposal will need to be massively more fleshed out.
adam commented 2025-12-29 20:19:41 +01:00
Author
Owner
Copy Link

@eronlloyd commented on GitHub (Nov 10, 2022):

Hello @jehrhardt-bego. You can track the cable connectors via the front/rear port types, and then define the cable type (such as OS2) in that record to properly model the entire cable. It would be nice to populate the optical cable types with the proper ITU codes (could be a custom field for now), but otherwise this should do what you need.

@eronlloyd commented on GitHub (Nov 10, 2022): Hello @jehrhardt-bego. You can track the cable connectors via the front/rear port types, and then define the cable type (such as OS2) in that record to properly model the entire cable. It would be nice to populate the optical cable types with the proper ITU codes (could be a custom field for now), but otherwise this should do what you need.
adam commented 2025-12-29 20:19:41 +01:00
Author
Owner
Copy Link

@apellini commented on GitHub (Nov 21, 2022):

But using Front Port and Rear Port has not sense on my point of view. Having the possibility to document the connector on both side could be useful (pheraps in some case mandatory).

I think that Front Port and Rear Port are used for Patch Panel purposes or for documenting ports that are present on device that are vendor specific.

@apellini commented on GitHub (Nov 21, 2022): But using Front Port and Rear Port has not sense on my point of view. Having the possibility to document the connector on both side could be useful (pheraps in some case mandatory). I think that Front Port and Rear Port are used for Patch Panel purposes or for documenting ports that are present on device that are vendor specific.
adam commented 2025-12-29 20:19:42 +01:00
Author
Owner
Copy Link

@github-actions[bot] commented on GitHub (Jan 20, 2023):

This issue has been automatically marked as stale because it has not had recent activity. It will be closed if no further activity occurs. NetBox is governed by a small group of core maintainers which means not all opened issues may receive direct feedback. Do not attempt to circumvent this process by "bumping" the issue; doing so will result in its immediate closure and you may be barred from participating in any future discussions. Please see our contributing guide.

@github-actions[bot] commented on GitHub (Jan 20, 2023): This issue has been automatically marked as stale because it has not had recent activity. It will be closed if no further activity occurs. NetBox is governed by a small group of core maintainers which means not all opened issues may receive direct feedback. **Do not** attempt to circumvent this process by "bumping" the issue; doing so will result in its immediate closure and you may be barred from participating in any future discussions. Please see our [contributing guide](https://github.com/netbox-community/netbox/blob/develop/CONTRIBUTING.md).
adam commented 2025-12-29 20:19:42 +01:00
Author
Owner
Copy Link

@github-actions[bot] commented on GitHub (Feb 20, 2023):

This issue has been automatically closed due to lack of activity. In an effort to reduce noise, please do not comment any further. Note that the core maintainers may elect to reopen this issue at a later date if deemed necessary.

@github-actions[bot] commented on GitHub (Feb 20, 2023): This issue has been automatically closed due to lack of activity. In an effort to reduce noise, please do not comment any further. Note that the core maintainers may elect to reopen this issue at a later date if deemed necessary.
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 pending closure 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#7141
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?