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

Interface Templates should include custom fields attached to DCIM>Interface #7162

New Issue
Closed
opened 2025-12-29 20:19:57 +01:00 by adam · 4 comments
adam commented 2025-12-29 20:19:57 +01:00
Owner
Copy Link

Originally created by @dpotter-intoto on GitHub (Oct 26, 2022).

NetBox version

v3.3.5

Feature type

Change to existing functionality

Proposed functionality

Interface templates (which are created with Device Types) should allow the specification of values for custom fields that have been added to DCIM>Interface.

This will allow the device type to contain values for custom fields on interfaces as well as stock fields on interfaces.

Use case

Any user who has the need for a custom field on DCIM>Interface is also likely to desire a default value that may vary from interface to interface.

For example, a user creates a custom field requires_ptp for DCIM>Interface. This field specifies whether this interface requires PTP timing information from the network.

When I create a device, the values "true" or "false" should be automatically populated in this field for each interface, based on the default value kept inside the device type's interface template.

Currently, this is not possible, because interface templates only allow users to specify values for stock fields, not custom fields.

Database changes

unknown. Possibly a change to how interface templates are stored.

External dependencies

none

Originally created by @dpotter-intoto on GitHub (Oct 26, 2022). ### NetBox version v3.3.5 ### Feature type Change to existing functionality ### Proposed functionality **Interface templates** (which are created with **Device Types**) should allow the specification of values for custom fields that have been added to `DCIM>Interface`. This will allow the device type to contain values for custom fields on interfaces as well as stock fields on interfaces. ### Use case Any user who has the need for a custom field on DCIM>Interface is also likely to desire a default value that may vary from interface to interface. For example, a user creates a custom field `requires_ptp` for DCIM>Interface. This field specifies whether this interface requires PTP timing information from the network. When I create a device, the values "true" or "false" should be automatically populated in this field for each interface, based on the default value kept inside the device type's interface template. Currently, this is not possible, because interface templates only allow users to specify values for stock fields, not custom fields. ### Database changes unknown. Possibly a change to how interface templates are stored. ### External dependencies none
adam added the type: feature label 2025-12-29 20:19:57 +01:00
adam closed this issue 2025-12-29 20:19:57 +01:00
adam commented 2025-12-29 20:19:58 +01:00
Author
Owner
Copy Link

@sleepinggenius2 commented on GitHub (Oct 26, 2022):

I had proposed this for all of the device component templates in #9243 as well, but it unfortunately did not gain a lot of traction then. I would still love to see this implemented, as my organization is facing similar issues to yours.

It would also be nice to have some more of the core fields implemented in templates as well, so you can do things like disable interfaces by default or set a default MTU, speed, duplex, or 802.1Q Mode.

@sleepinggenius2 commented on GitHub (Oct 26, 2022): I had proposed this for all of the device component templates in #9243 as well, but it unfortunately did not gain a lot of traction then. I would still love to see this implemented, as my organization is facing similar issues to yours. It would also be nice to have some more of the core fields implemented in templates as well, so you can do things like disable interfaces by default or set a default MTU, speed, duplex, or 802.1Q Mode.
adam commented 2025-12-29 20:19:58 +01:00
Author
Owner
Copy Link

@kkthxbye-code commented on GitHub (Oct 27, 2022):

I'll close this as duplicate of #9243 as I think that is the best description of the feature. I have re-opened the issue to give it another chance as I think it's a neat idea if we can figure out a good implementation.

@kkthxbye-code commented on GitHub (Oct 27, 2022): I'll close this as duplicate of #9243 as I think that is the best description of the feature. I have re-opened the issue to give it another chance as I think it's a neat idea if we can figure out a good implementation.
adam commented 2025-12-29 20:19:58 +01:00
Author
Owner
Copy Link

@sleepinggenius2 commented on GitHub (Oct 28, 2022):

@kkthxbye-code Can you please unlock #9243 for comments?

@sleepinggenius2 commented on GitHub (Oct 28, 2022): @kkthxbye-code Can you please unlock #9243 for comments?
adam commented 2025-12-29 20:19:59 +01:00
Author
Owner
Copy Link

@kkthxbye-code commented on GitHub (Oct 28, 2022):

@sleepinggenius2 - Sorry my bad, missed that🤦

@kkthxbye-code commented on GitHub (Oct 28, 2022): @sleepinggenius2 - Sorry my bad, missed that🤦
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#7162
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?