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 types missing #8240

New Issue
Closed
opened 2025-12-29 20:34:13 +01:00 by adam · 7 comments
adam commented 2025-12-29 20:34:13 +01:00
Owner
Copy Link

Originally created by @travisjohnsonga on GitHub (Jun 24, 2023).

NetBox version

v3.5.3

Python version

3.8

Steps to Reproduce

Add interface

Cisco types missing:

10/100/1000BaseTX - Fixed Ethernet
SFP-10GBase-SR
100G QSFP 40/100GE SRBD

Working to automate interface creation via netmiko and API using show interface status command with the intent to match the SFP / QSFP type installed.

Expected Behavior

Add choices to the list of options

Observed Behavior

Choice options are not available and must choose the closest option.

Originally created by @travisjohnsonga on GitHub (Jun 24, 2023). ### NetBox version v3.5.3 ### Python version 3.8 ### Steps to Reproduce Add interface Cisco types missing: 10/100/1000BaseTX - Fixed Ethernet SFP-10GBase-SR 100G QSFP 40/100GE SRBD Working to automate interface creation via netmiko and API using show interface status command with the intent to match the SFP / QSFP type installed. ### Expected Behavior Add choices to the list of options ### Observed Behavior Choice options are not available and must choose the closest option.
adam added the type: bug label 2025-12-29 20:34:13 +01:00
adam closed this issue 2025-12-29 20:34:13 +01:00
adam commented 2025-12-29 20:34:14 +01:00
Author
Owner
Copy Link

@peterbaumert commented on GitHub (Jun 24, 2023):

SFP modules are not interface types. The type is then SFP+ 10G or SFP28 and so on. To model the sfp modules i think currently you can only use inventory items.

@peterbaumert commented on GitHub (Jun 24, 2023): SFP modules are not interface types. The type is then SFP+ 10G or SFP28 and so on. To model the sfp modules i think currently you can only use inventory items.
adam commented 2025-12-29 20:34:14 +01:00
Author
Owner
Copy Link

@pobradovic08 commented on GitHub (Jun 25, 2023):

As @peterbaumert already explained, these are not interface types. In your case:

  • 10/100/1000BaseTX - Fixed Ethernet is 1000BASE-T (1GE)
  • SFP-10GBase-SR is SFP+ (10GE)
  • 100G QSFP 40/100GE SRBD is QSFP28 (100G)

Interface field represents just the type of the interface, not the type (model) of SFP module inserted to it. You can imagine how long this list would be if it included every SFP model from every vendor, and how hard would be to maintain it.

@pobradovic08 commented on GitHub (Jun 25, 2023): As @peterbaumert already explained, these are not interface types. In your case: - 10/100/1000BaseTX - Fixed Ethernet is `1000BASE-T (1GE)` - SFP-10GBase-SR is `SFP+ (10GE)` - 100G QSFP 40/100GE SRBD is `QSFP28 (100G)` Interface field represents just the type of the interface, not the type (model) of SFP module inserted to it. You can imagine how long this list would be if it included every SFP model from every vendor, and how hard would be to maintain it.
adam commented 2025-12-29 20:34:14 +01:00
Author
Owner
Copy Link

@travisjohnsonga commented on GitHub (Jun 26, 2023):

Thanks for the feedback - and I understand the differences.

Would it be possible to put these options into a db table like has been done with the device types and models? The issue I am trying to resolve for myself is not having to map the interface from CLI output to an interface type in netbox when creating the interfaces based on show interface status (Cisco for example)

@travisjohnsonga commented on GitHub (Jun 26, 2023): Thanks for the feedback - and I understand the differences. Would it be possible to put these options into a db table like has been done with the device types and models? The issue I am trying to resolve for myself is not having to map the interface from CLI output to an interface type in netbox when creating the interfaces based on show interface status (Cisco for example)
adam commented 2025-12-29 20:34:14 +01:00
Author
Owner
Copy Link

@abhi1693 commented on GitHub (Jun 26, 2023):

If you do this the right way by having the device type definition ready, you then don't need to rely on cli output for your interfaces. As soon as you create your device from the type, all correct interfaces will be added by default.

But if you still want this to be added to db, that's not possible and is something that won't be implemented.

I'm going to close this issue as this is not a bug with implementation.

@abhi1693 commented on GitHub (Jun 26, 2023): If you do this the right way by having the device type definition ready, you then don't need to rely on cli output for your interfaces. As soon as you create your device from the type, all correct interfaces will be added by default. But if you still want this to be added to db, that's not possible and is something that won't be implemented. I'm going to close this issue as this is not a bug with implementation.
adam commented 2025-12-29 20:34:15 +01:00
Author
Owner
Copy Link

@travisjohnsonga commented on GitHub (Jun 26, 2023):

On Sun, Jun 25, 2023 at 11:35 PM Abhimanyu Saharan @.***>
wrote:

Closed #12994 https://github.com/netbox-community/netbox/issues/12994
as not planned.

—
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
https://github.com/netbox-community/netbox/issues/12994#event-9632994153,
or unsubscribe
https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AZ4D7ZJ7IDBUK7ML2MLHWYTXNEGQ7ANCNFSM6AAAAAAZSF7KAU
.
You are receiving this because you authored the thread.Message ID:
@.***>

So if I create a Cisco 9500-48YC, it should create 48 x 25gb ports, and 4 x
40/100 gig ports?

If so, I’m doing something wrong.

@travisjohnsonga commented on GitHub (Jun 26, 2023): On Sun, Jun 25, 2023 at 11:35 PM Abhimanyu Saharan ***@***.***> wrote: > Closed #12994 <https://github.com/netbox-community/netbox/issues/12994> > as not planned. > > — > Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub > <https://github.com/netbox-community/netbox/issues/12994#event-9632994153>, > or unsubscribe > <https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AZ4D7ZJ7IDBUK7ML2MLHWYTXNEGQ7ANCNFSM6AAAAAAZSF7KAU> > . > You are receiving this because you authored the thread.Message ID: > ***@***.***> > So if I create a Cisco 9500-48YC, it should create 48 x 25gb ports, and 4 x 40/100 gig ports? If so, I’m doing something wrong.
adam commented 2025-12-29 20:34:15 +01:00
Author
Owner
Copy Link

@abhi1693 commented on GitHub (Jun 26, 2023):

So if I create a Cisco 9500-48YC, it should create 48 x 25gb ports, and 4 x 40/100 gig ports?

As long as you have the interfaces on the device type before you create the device .

You can read more in the documentation at https://docs.netbox.dev/en/stable/models/dcim/devicetype/

https://github.com/netbox-community/netbox-zero-to-hero

@abhi1693 commented on GitHub (Jun 26, 2023): > So if I create a Cisco 9500-48YC, it should create 48 x 25gb ports, and 4 x 40/100 gig ports? As long as you have the interfaces on the device type before you create the device . You can read more in the documentation at https://docs.netbox.dev/en/stable/models/dcim/devicetype/ https://github.com/netbox-community/netbox-zero-to-hero
adam commented 2025-12-29 20:34:15 +01:00
Author
Owner
Copy Link

@travisjohnsonga commented on GitHub (Jun 26, 2023):

Thank you for that info, I'll read that zero - to - hero link.

@travisjohnsonga commented on GitHub (Jun 26, 2023): Thank you for that info, I'll read that zero - to - hero link.
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#8240
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?