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 Ordering doesn't order SubInterfaces correctly #837

New Issue
Closed
opened 2025-12-29 16:26:13 +01:00 by adam · 2 comments
adam commented 2025-12-29 16:26:13 +01:00
Owner
Copy Link

Originally created by @zevlag on GitHub (Apr 6, 2017).

Issue type: bug report

Python version: 2.7.9
NetBox version: v2.0-beta2

I have created VLAN subInterfaces on my Cisco IOS-XE gear and represent them in NetBox. They don't sort as expected. I use the Alphabetic sort order.

Here is an example:

GigabitEthernet0/0/0		Not connected 
GigabitEthernet0/0/1		Not connected 
GigabitEthernet0/0/2 		Not connected 
GigabitEthernet0/0/3		Brocade NetIron CER 2024C	ethernet 1/24   
GigabitEthernet0		Not connected 
GigabitEthernet0/0/2.2		Virtual interface
GigabitEthernet0/0/0.3 		Virtual interface
GigabitEthernet0/0/2.4		Virtual interface
GigabitEthernet0/0/2.9		Virtual interface
GigabitEthernet0/0/2.10		Virtual interface
GigabitEthernet0/0/2.25		Virtual interface
GigabitEthernet0/0/2.26		Virtual interface
GigabitEthernet0/0/2.27		Virtual interface
GigabitEthernet0/0/0.110		Virtual interface
GigabitEthernet0/0/0.117		Virtual interface
GigabitEthernet0/0/1.117		Virtual interface
GigabitEthernet0/0/0.120		Virtual interface
GigabitEthernet0/0/0.130		Virtual interface
GigabitEthernet0/0/0.200		Virtual interface
GigabitEthernet0/0/0.210		Virtual interface
GigabitEthernet0/0/0.220		Virtual interface
Loopback0		Virtual interface
Loopback1 		Virtual interface
Loopback100 		Virtual interface
Loopback999 		Virtual interface
Tunnel1 		Virtual interface
Tunnel10		Virtual interface
Tunnel11		Virtual interface
Tunnel12		Virtual interface
Tunnel13		Virtual interface
Tunnel100 		Virtual interface
Tunnel110 		Virtual interface
Tunnel4030 		Virtual interface

My specific concerns are:

  • GigabitEthernet0/0/2.2 is not before GigabitEthernet0/0/3
  • GigabitEthernet0/0/1.117 is before GigabitEthernet0/0/0.120
  • GigabitEthernet0 is not before GigabitEthernet0/0/0

There are two changes that I believe would solve these problems without negatively affecting other cases.

  1. Modify the query to seperate on periods and comma's. ie ':([0-9]+)$' becomes '[.:]([0-9]+)$'
    https://github.com/digitalocean/netbox/blob/v2-develop/netbox/dcim/models.py#L809
--- a/netbox/dcim/models.py
+++ b/netbox/dcim/models.py
@@ -806,10 +806,10 @@ class InterfaceManager(models.Manager):
         }[method]
         return queryset.extra(select={
             '_name': "SUBSTRING({} FROM '^([^0-9]+)')".format(sql_col),
-            '_slot': "CAST(SUBSTRING({} FROM '([0-9]+)\/[0-9]+\/[0-9]+(:[0-9]+)?$') AS integer)".format(sql_col),
-            '_subslot': "CAST(SUBSTRING({} FROM '([0-9]+)\/[0-9]+(:[0-9]+)?$') AS integer)".format(sql_col),
-            '_position': "CAST(SUBSTRING({} FROM '([0-9]+)(:[0-9]+)?$') AS integer)".format(sql_col),
-            '_channel': "CAST(SUBSTRING({} FROM ':([0-9]+)$') AS integer)".format(sql_col),
+            '_slot': "CAST(SUBSTRING({} FROM '([0-9]+)\/[0-9]+\/[0-9]+([.:][0-9]+)?$') AS integer)".format(sql_col),
+            '_subslot': "CAST(SUBSTRING({} FROM '([0-9]+)\/[0-9]+([.:][0-9]+)?$') AS integer)".format(sql_col),
+            '_position': "CAST(SUBSTRING({} FROM '([0-9]+)([.:][0-9]+)?$') AS integer)".format(sql_col),
+            '_channel': "CAST(SUBSTRING({} FROM '[.:]([0-9]+)$') AS integer)".format(sql_col),
         }).order_by(*ordering)
  1. Modify the query to order by nulls first for each component. I don't know enough python/django to do this, but the feature is there in django and postgres.
Originally created by @zevlag on GitHub (Apr 6, 2017). <!-- Please note: GitHub issues are to be used only for feature requests and bug reports. For installation assistance or general discussion, please join us on the mailing list: https://groups.google.com/forum/#!forum/netbox-discuss Please indicate "bug report" or "feature request" below. Be sure to search the existing set of issues (both open and closed) to see if a similar issue has already been raised. --> ### Issue type: bug report <!-- If filing a bug, please indicate the version of Python and NetBox you are running. (This is not necessary for feature requests.) --> **Python version:** 2.7.9 **NetBox version:** v2.0-beta2 I have created VLAN subInterfaces on my Cisco IOS-XE gear and represent them in NetBox. They don't sort as expected. I use the Alphabetic sort order. Here is an example: ``` GigabitEthernet0/0/0 Not connected GigabitEthernet0/0/1 Not connected GigabitEthernet0/0/2 Not connected GigabitEthernet0/0/3 Brocade NetIron CER 2024C ethernet 1/24 GigabitEthernet0 Not connected GigabitEthernet0/0/2.2 Virtual interface GigabitEthernet0/0/0.3 Virtual interface GigabitEthernet0/0/2.4 Virtual interface GigabitEthernet0/0/2.9 Virtual interface GigabitEthernet0/0/2.10 Virtual interface GigabitEthernet0/0/2.25 Virtual interface GigabitEthernet0/0/2.26 Virtual interface GigabitEthernet0/0/2.27 Virtual interface GigabitEthernet0/0/0.110 Virtual interface GigabitEthernet0/0/0.117 Virtual interface GigabitEthernet0/0/1.117 Virtual interface GigabitEthernet0/0/0.120 Virtual interface GigabitEthernet0/0/0.130 Virtual interface GigabitEthernet0/0/0.200 Virtual interface GigabitEthernet0/0/0.210 Virtual interface GigabitEthernet0/0/0.220 Virtual interface Loopback0 Virtual interface Loopback1 Virtual interface Loopback100 Virtual interface Loopback999 Virtual interface Tunnel1 Virtual interface Tunnel10 Virtual interface Tunnel11 Virtual interface Tunnel12 Virtual interface Tunnel13 Virtual interface Tunnel100 Virtual interface Tunnel110 Virtual interface Tunnel4030 Virtual interface ``` My specific concerns are: - `GigabitEthernet0/0/2.2` is not before `GigabitEthernet0/0/3` - `GigabitEthernet0/0/1.117` is before `GigabitEthernet0/0/0.120` - `GigabitEthernet0` is not before `GigabitEthernet0/0/0` There are two changes that I believe would solve these problems without negatively affecting other cases. 1. Modify the query to seperate on periods and comma's. ie `':([0-9]+)$'` becomes `'[.:]([0-9]+)$'` https://github.com/digitalocean/netbox/blob/v2-develop/netbox/dcim/models.py#L809 ``` --- a/netbox/dcim/models.py +++ b/netbox/dcim/models.py @@ -806,10 +806,10 @@ class InterfaceManager(models.Manager): }[method] return queryset.extra(select={ '_name': "SUBSTRING({} FROM '^([^0-9]+)')".format(sql_col), - '_slot': "CAST(SUBSTRING({} FROM '([0-9]+)\/[0-9]+\/[0-9]+(:[0-9]+)?$') AS integer)".format(sql_col), - '_subslot': "CAST(SUBSTRING({} FROM '([0-9]+)\/[0-9]+(:[0-9]+)?$') AS integer)".format(sql_col), - '_position': "CAST(SUBSTRING({} FROM '([0-9]+)(:[0-9]+)?$') AS integer)".format(sql_col), - '_channel': "CAST(SUBSTRING({} FROM ':([0-9]+)$') AS integer)".format(sql_col), + '_slot': "CAST(SUBSTRING({} FROM '([0-9]+)\/[0-9]+\/[0-9]+([.:][0-9]+)?$') AS integer)".format(sql_col), + '_subslot': "CAST(SUBSTRING({} FROM '([0-9]+)\/[0-9]+([.:][0-9]+)?$') AS integer)".format(sql_col), + '_position': "CAST(SUBSTRING({} FROM '([0-9]+)([.:][0-9]+)?$') AS integer)".format(sql_col), + '_channel': "CAST(SUBSTRING({} FROM '[.:]([0-9]+)$') AS integer)".format(sql_col), }).order_by(*ordering) ``` 2. Modify the query to order by nulls first for each component. I don't know enough python/django to do this, but the feature is [there](https://docs.djangoproject.com/en/dev/ref/models/expressions/#django.db.models.Expression.asc) in django and [postgres](https://www.postgresql.org/docs/current/static/queries-order.html). <!-- If filing a bug, please record the exact steps taken to reproduce the bug and any errors messages that are generated. If filing a feature request, please precisely describe the data model or workflow you would like to see implemented, and provide a use case. -->
adam added the type: bug label 2025-12-29 16:26:13 +01:00
adam closed this issue 2025-12-29 16:26:13 +01:00
adam commented 2025-12-29 16:26:14 +01:00
Author
Owner
Copy Link

@InsaneSplash commented on GitHub (Apr 6, 2017):

I have the same representation as above and would be great to group them together.

@InsaneSplash commented on GitHub (Apr 6, 2017): I have the same representation as above and would be great to group them together.
adam commented 2025-12-29 16:26:14 +01:00
Author
Owner
Copy Link

@jeremystretch commented on GitHub (Apr 6, 2017):

The above fixes most of the ordering problems. It doesn't address e.g. GigabitEthernet0 being ordered after GigabitEthernet0/0/0, but that's likely going to require rewriting the entire ordering scheme. It looks like Django 1.11 might make this easier than in the past, but it's not a priority right now.

@jeremystretch commented on GitHub (Apr 6, 2017): The above fixes most of the ordering problems. It doesn't address e.g. GigabitEthernet0 being ordered after GigabitEthernet0/0/0, but that's likely going to require rewriting the entire ordering scheme. It looks like Django 1.11 might make this easier than in the past, but it's not a priority right 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#837
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?