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

Prefixes overview shows incorrect "Children" count if the prefix has status "Container" #7522

New Issue
Closed
opened 2025-12-29 20:24:42 +01:00 by adam · 4 comments
adam commented 2025-12-29 20:24:42 +01:00
Owner
Copy Link

Originally created by @sealie on GitHub (Jan 16, 2023).

NetBox version

v3.3.5

Python version

3.8

Steps to Reproduce

  1. Create prefix 10.255.1.0/24, 10.255.2.0/24 and 10.255.3.0/24 in VRF-A
  2. Create prefix 10.255.4.0/24, 10.255.5.0/24 and 10.255.6.0/24 in VRF-B
  3. Create prefix 10.255.7.0/24, 10.255.8.0/24 and 10.255.9.0/24 in VRF Global
  4. Create prefix 10.255.0.0/16 with status "Container" in VRF Global
  5. Browse to https:///ipam/prefixes/?status=container
  6. Observe the "Children" count is 3

Expected Behavior

I would expect the "Children" count to be 9 instead of 3, if the 10.255.0.0/16 container prefix is created in the Global VRF as type "Container".

If the 10.255.0.0/16 prefix was set to "Active", I would expect it to only show the child prefixes matching the same VRF as the /16 prefix.

Observed Behavior

The prefixes overview only shows 3 children prefixes, although its status is set to "Container".

Originally created by @sealie on GitHub (Jan 16, 2023). ### NetBox version v3.3.5 ### Python version 3.8 ### Steps to Reproduce 1. Create prefix 10.255.1.0/24, 10.255.2.0/24 and 10.255.3.0/24 in VRF-A 2. Create prefix 10.255.4.0/24, 10.255.5.0/24 and 10.255.6.0/24 in VRF-B 3. Create prefix 10.255.7.0/24, 10.255.8.0/24 and 10.255.9.0/24 in VRF Global 4. Create prefix 10.255.0.0/16 with status "Container" in VRF Global 5. Browse to https://<IPAM URL>/ipam/prefixes/?status=container 6. Observe the "Children" count is 3 ### Expected Behavior I would expect the "Children" count to be 9 instead of 3, if the 10.255.0.0/16 container prefix is created in the Global VRF as type "Container". If the 10.255.0.0/16 prefix was set to "Active", I would expect it to only show the child prefixes matching the same VRF as the /16 prefix. ### Observed Behavior The prefixes overview only shows 3 children prefixes, although its status is set to "Container".
adam added the type: bug label 2025-12-29 20:24:42 +01:00
adam closed this issue 2025-12-29 20:24:42 +01:00
adam commented 2025-12-29 20:24:43 +01:00
Author
Owner
Copy Link

@enribla commented on GitHub (Jan 16, 2023):

Hi Sealie,
From my point of view it's working properly.
Each VRF is independent from the others, that also affects to the global vrf and it reflects the reality on the routers routing tables

@enribla commented on GitHub (Jan 16, 2023): Hi Sealie, From my point of view it's working properly. Each VRF is independent from the others, that also affects to the global vrf and it reflects the reality on the routers routing tables
adam commented 2025-12-29 20:24:43 +01:00
Author
Owner
Copy Link

@sealie commented on GitHub (Jan 16, 2023):

Hi Sealie, From my point of view it's working properly. Each VRF is independent from the others, that also affects to the global vrf and it reflects the reality on the routers routing tables

Hello, enribla.

I am well aware of how VRFs work outside and inside Netbox. But choosing "Container" as status instead of "Active" negates showing child prefixes only from the same VRF in "Child prefixes", but shows child prefixes regardless of what VRFs they are in (suitable for linknet prefixes where all child prefixes are in different VRFs) I was just hoping the prefixes overview was going to show the total amount of prefixes regardless of VRF - just like the "Container" status works with the "Child prefixes" tab.

@sealie commented on GitHub (Jan 16, 2023): > Hi Sealie, From my point of view it's working properly. Each VRF is independent from the others, that also affects to the global vrf and it reflects the reality on the routers routing tables Hello, enribla. I am well aware of how VRFs work outside and inside Netbox. But choosing "Container" as status instead of "Active" negates showing child prefixes only from the same VRF in "Child prefixes", but shows child prefixes regardless of what VRFs they are in (suitable for linknet prefixes where all child prefixes are in different VRFs) I was just hoping the prefixes overview was going to show the total amount of prefixes regardless of VRF - just like the "Container" status works with the "Child prefixes" tab.
adam commented 2025-12-29 20:24:44 +01:00
Author
Owner
Copy Link

@enribla commented on GitHub (Jan 17, 2023):

Hi Sealie,

Understood. It shows all the child prefixes regardless of the vrf but in the overview it only counts the prefixes of the same vrf
Yes, it is not consistent.
Thanks for the clarification

@enribla commented on GitHub (Jan 17, 2023): Hi Sealie, Understood. It shows all the child prefixes regardless of the vrf but in the overview it only counts the prefixes of the same vrf Yes, it is not consistent. Thanks for the clarification
adam commented 2025-12-29 20:24:44 +01:00
Author
Owner
Copy Link

@DanSheps commented on GitHub (Jan 20, 2023):

While this is a valid bug currently, I think we should wait until the changes to the prefix and IP address model go through in 3.5.

Currently, the associations between IP Address and Prefixes or Prefix and Prefix are a "soft" relationship.

The FR for 3.5 will change that to a more hard relationship.

As such, I am going to close this out for now.

@DanSheps commented on GitHub (Jan 20, 2023): While this is a valid bug currently, I think we should wait until the changes to the prefix and IP address model go through in 3.5. Currently, the associations between IP Address and Prefixes or Prefix and Prefix are a "soft" relationship. The FR for 3.5 will change that to a more hard relationship. As such, I am going to close this out for now.
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: bug
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#7522
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?