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

Multiple L2VPN terminations to the physical interface #8783

New Issue
Closed
opened 2025-12-29 20:41:09 +01:00 by adam · 1 comment
adam commented 2025-12-29 20:41:09 +01:00
Owner
Copy Link

Originally created by @MarianRychtecky on GitHub (Oct 30, 2023).

NetBox version

v3.6.4

Feature type

Change to existing functionality

Proposed functionality

We document VLANs transferred through an EVPN/VxLAN fabric with L2VPNs.
Currently, we cannot add the interface to two different L2VPN instances, which means that we cannot document all services bound to the specific physical interface.
Therefore, we propose to allow multiple L2VPNs to be terminated on the physical interface.

Additionally, expanding the L2VPN port GUI with a device box:

image

Recent GUI forms do not show the device for selection, only the interface. It is tough to select the correct device/interface combination.

Use case

We need a model where the service provided to the customer is a unique bind between the physical interface and the VLAN provided. L2VPN Termination is an excellent option.
Another possible option is to assign VLAN to the physical interface, but this association does not provide an association with unique parameters.
We run a service with private peering and public peering; we need to terminate both services (VNIs) on a physical interface with multiple different parameters, such as Service ID, client's MAC address, tenant, etc.

Database changes

No response

External dependencies

No response

Originally created by @MarianRychtecky on GitHub (Oct 30, 2023). ### NetBox version v3.6.4 ### Feature type Change to existing functionality ### Proposed functionality We document VLANs transferred through an EVPN/VxLAN fabric with L2VPNs. Currently, we cannot add the interface to two different L2VPN instances, which means that we cannot document all services bound to the specific physical interface. Therefore, we propose to allow multiple L2VPNs to be terminated on the physical interface. Additionally, expanding the L2VPN port GUI with a device box: ![image](https://github.com/netbox-community/netbox/assets/36925394/7686e1d4-7f80-4bcf-8f2d-16dc85abd457) Recent GUI forms do not show the device for selection, only the interface. It is tough to select the correct device/interface combination. ### Use case We need a model where the service provided to the customer is a unique bind between the physical interface and the VLAN provided. L2VPN Termination is an excellent option. Another possible option is to assign VLAN to the physical interface, but this association does not provide an association with unique parameters. We run a service with private peering and public peering; we need to terminate both services (VNIs) on a physical interface with multiple different parameters, such as Service ID, client's MAC address, tenant, etc. ### Database changes _No response_ ### External dependencies _No response_
adam added the type: featurestatus: duplicate labels 2025-12-29 20:41:09 +01:00
adam closed this issue 2025-12-29 20:41:09 +01:00
adam commented 2025-12-29 20:41:10 +01:00
Author
Owner
Copy Link

@DanSheps commented on GitHub (Oct 31, 2023):

Please see previous discussion on this topic in #10404 and #10419. This has been discussed and while your idea is not without merit the way I have typically seen this done is VIA subinterfaces, service templates or service instances (I live in Cisco world). There is no built in method to create a service instance/template in NetBox currently and it is unlikely to be added before this FR so you would have to make do with subinterfaces. The other way it is typically done is VIA vlans on device (Nexus) but typically not to a physical interface directly

There is also #11466 which will add a device to the VLAN + Device model.

If you want to share your config (privately if you wish) with me I can take a look and see what options we have.

As it stands right now, this FR does not add anything further then already discussed. Please continue the discussion in the linked discussion until a viable, actionable FR can be proposed.

@DanSheps commented on GitHub (Oct 31, 2023): Please see previous discussion on this topic in #10404 and #10419. This has been discussed and while your idea is not without merit the way I have typically seen this done is VIA subinterfaces, service templates or service instances (I live in Cisco world). There is no built in method to create a service instance/template in NetBox currently and it is unlikely to be added before this FR so you would have to make do with subinterfaces. The other way it is typically done is VIA vlans on device (Nexus) but typically not to a physical interface directly There is also #11466 which will add a device to the VLAN + Device model. If you want to share your config (privately if you wish) with me I can take a look and see what options we have. As it stands right now, this FR does not add anything further then already discussed. Please continue the discussion in the linked discussion until a viable, actionable FR can be proposed.
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 status: duplicate 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#8783
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?