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

feature: Support vxlan 24bit segment id #847

New Issue
Closed
opened 2025-12-29 16:26:19 +01:00 by adam · 4 comments
adam commented 2025-12-29 16:26:19 +01:00
Owner
Copy Link

Originally created by @killsudo on GitHub (Apr 9, 2017).

Add ability to convert a new vlan to vxlan to allow for a 24bit segment id outside of the 0-4096 range.
https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc7348#page-10
Vxlans can retain the existing vlan attributes for naming and tenants.

Originally created by @killsudo on GitHub (Apr 9, 2017). Add ability to convert a new vlan to vxlan to allow for a 24bit segment id outside of the 0-4096 range. https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc7348#page-10 Vxlans can retain the existing vlan attributes for naming and tenants.
adam closed this issue 2025-12-29 16:26:19 +01:00
adam commented 2025-12-29 16:26:19 +01:00
Author
Owner
Copy Link

@jeremystretch commented on GitHub (Apr 9, 2017):

VXLAN is an entirely separate concept from traditional VLANs. The numeric range for VLAN IDs is 1-4095 as defined by IEEE 802.1Q, so that's what the VLAN model supports. Support for VXLAN would necessitate an entirely new feature.

I'll leave this open for now in case you want to propose a data model to support VXLAN. Otherwise, this can be closed out.

@jeremystretch commented on GitHub (Apr 9, 2017): VXLAN is an entirely separate concept from traditional VLANs. The numeric range for VLAN IDs is 1-4095 as defined by IEEE 802.1Q, so that's what the VLAN model supports. Support for VXLAN would necessitate an entirely new feature. I'll leave this open for now in case you want to propose a data model to support VXLAN. Otherwise, this can be closed out.
adam commented 2025-12-29 16:26:19 +01:00
Author
Owner
Copy Link

@killsudo commented on GitHub (Apr 9, 2017):

For how they are being used today I would disagree. They simply define a layer2 object with a large id range when paired with evpn. With our Juniper QFX evpn fabric we have no vlans defined and instead are using vxlans. The vlan object already has the ability within netbox to cross multiple sites handling the DCI aspect of evpn/vxlan.

The way I would imagine this currently is to create a new 'vlan object' and check a box to enable 'vxlan' which would then allow you to store a 24bit segment id outside of the existing 1-4095 range.

We would then query the vlan list and check for the 'vxlan' flag to be true and capture the vxlan id via api for use in our scripts.

The only operational difference is loosing the ability to logically construct a mapping of vxlan to a vlan id at the edge for interconnecting legacy devices.

Long-term it would be nice to see vxlan functions expanded but right now I have a gaping source of truth for tracking nothing more then a 'name' and a 'segement id' to represent was is in essence a vlan object.

Ultimately I would love to see a way to represent the following

Juniper QFX switch > vxlan id > interface > logical unit > vlan-id
Juniper MX > 'tenant' > l3vpn(vrf/rd/rt/interface) > l2vpn (vrf/rd/rt/vxlan)

@killsudo commented on GitHub (Apr 9, 2017): For how they are being used today I would disagree. They simply define a layer2 object with a large id range when paired with evpn. With our Juniper QFX evpn fabric we have no vlans defined and instead are using vxlans. The vlan object already has the ability within netbox to cross multiple sites handling the DCI aspect of evpn/vxlan. The way I would imagine this currently is to create a new 'vlan object' and check a box to enable 'vxlan' which would then allow you to store a 24bit segment id outside of the existing 1-4095 range. We would then query the vlan list and check for the 'vxlan' flag to be true and capture the vxlan id via api for use in our scripts. The only operational difference is loosing the ability to logically construct a mapping of vxlan to a vlan id at the edge for interconnecting legacy devices. Long-term it would be nice to see vxlan functions expanded but right now I have a gaping source of truth for tracking nothing more then a 'name' and a 'segement id' to represent was is in essence a vlan object. Ultimately I would love to see a way to represent the following Juniper QFX switch > vxlan id > interface > logical unit > vlan-id Juniper MX > 'tenant' > l3vpn(vrf/rd/rt/interface) > l2vpn (vrf/rd/rt/vxlan)
adam commented 2025-12-29 16:26:20 +01:00
Author
Owner
Copy Link

@killsudo commented on GitHub (Apr 9, 2017):

In this example we are leveraging the JunOS autovni functionality to auto-generate the route-targets per vni so we do not even need to track those within the evpn domain.

killsudo@S2CASw3> show vlans

Routing instance VLAN name Tag Interfaces
default-switch CID_Killsudo-LAN80 NA
ae32.80*
vtep.32769*
vtep.32770*
vtep.32771*
vtep.32772*
vtep.32773*

killsudo@S2CASw3> show configuration vlans CID_Killsudo-LAN80
description "CID: Killsudo - LAN80";
interface ae32.80;
vxlan {
vni 5000080;
ingress-node-replication;
}

killsudo@S2CASw3> show configuration interfaces ae32.80
description "CID: Killsudo - LAN80";
vlan-id 80;

@killsudo commented on GitHub (Apr 9, 2017): In this example we are leveraging the JunOS autovni functionality to auto-generate the route-targets per vni so we do not even need to track those within the evpn domain. killsudo@S2CASw3> show vlans Routing instance VLAN name Tag Interfaces default-switch CID_Killsudo-LAN80 NA ae32.80* vtep.32769* vtep.32770* vtep.32771* vtep.32772* vtep.32773* killsudo@S2CASw3> show configuration vlans CID_Killsudo-LAN80 description "CID: Killsudo - LAN80"; interface ae32.80; vxlan { vni 5000080; ingress-node-replication; } killsudo@S2CASw3> show configuration interfaces ae32.80 description "CID: Killsudo - LAN80"; vlan-id 80;
adam commented 2025-12-29 16:26:20 +01:00
Author
Owner
Copy Link

@jeremystretch commented on GitHub (Apr 9, 2017):

Again, VLAN and VXLAN are entirely separate constructs and mixing the two will only result in confusion. I'm happy to add support for VXLANs to NetBox, but it needs an entirely new model and logic for mapping a VXLAN to other objects (including VLANs).

@jeremystretch commented on GitHub (Apr 9, 2017): Again, VLAN and VXLAN are entirely separate constructs and mixing the two will only result in confusion. I'm happy to add support for VXLANs to NetBox, but it needs an entirely new model and logic for mapping a VXLAN to other objects (including VLANs).
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
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#847
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?