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

ZTE ZXR10 VSC (Virtual Switch Cluster) #916

New Issue
Closed
opened 2025-12-29 16:26:57 +01:00 by adam · 6 comments
adam commented 2025-12-29 16:26:57 +01:00
Owner
Copy Link

Originally created by @zhaknafein on GitHub (May 6, 2017).

Issue type: feature request

Since we are using this switches in our datacenter, i would like to add the stacking ports. They use a 40GB MiniSAS cable and the ports are shown as "xlgei" ("gei" for 1GB ports, "xgei" for 10GB ports).
ZTE calls the stacking technology VSC (Virtual Switch Cluster).
Is it possible to add this kind of ports as MiniSAS or under the Stacking group?
Thanks!

Originally created by @zhaknafein on GitHub (May 6, 2017). # Issue type: feature request Since we are using this switches in our datacenter, i would like to add the stacking ports. They use a 40GB MiniSAS cable and the ports are shown as "xlgei" ("gei" for 1GB ports, "xgei" for 10GB ports). ZTE calls the stacking technology VSC (Virtual Switch Cluster). Is it possible to add this kind of ports as MiniSAS or under the Stacking group? Thanks!
adam closed this issue 2025-12-29 16:26:57 +01:00
adam commented 2025-12-29 16:26:57 +01:00
Author
Owner
Copy Link

@jeremystretch commented on GitHub (May 8, 2017):

Can you provide a link to documentation of the interface specification? I can't seem to find anything.

@jeremystretch commented on GitHub (May 8, 2017): Can you provide a link to documentation of the interface specification? I can't seem to find anything.
adam commented 2025-12-29 16:26:57 +01:00
Author
Owner
Copy Link

@zhaknafein commented on GitHub (May 9, 2017):

I have only offline documentation available, i have attached the pages related to the stacking expansion module with the 40GB ports (ZTE_59_2L_SK.pdf) and VSC configuration (ZTE_VSC.pdf), let me know if you need further informations.

@zhaknafein commented on GitHub (May 9, 2017): I have only offline documentation available, i have attached the pages related to the stacking expansion module with the 40GB ports ([ZTE_59_2L_SK.pdf](https://github.com/digitalocean/netbox/files/987378/ZTE_59_2L_SK.pdf)) and VSC configuration ([ZTE_VSC.pdf](https://github.com/digitalocean/netbox/files/987379/ZTE_VSC.pdf)), let me know if you need further informations.
adam commented 2025-12-29 16:26:58 +01:00
Author
Owner
Copy Link

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

Given that these use a standard mini-SAS form factor, we probably don't want to define it as something specific to ZTE. But we also don't currently define storage interfaces. I'll leave this open for comment for now.

@jeremystretch commented on GitHub (May 9, 2017): Given that these use a standard mini-SAS form factor, we probably don't want to define it as something specific to ZTE. But we also don't currently define storage interfaces. I'll leave this open for comment for now.
adam commented 2025-12-29 16:26:58 +01:00
Author
Owner
Copy Link

@zhaknafein commented on GitHub (May 9, 2017):

Maybe just adding the interface type like Juniper VCP would be enough?

@zhaknafein commented on GitHub (May 9, 2017): Maybe just adding the interface type like Juniper VCP would be enough?
adam commented 2025-12-29 16:26:58 +01:00
Author
Owner
Copy Link

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

My point is that (as far as I can tell) this isn't a ZTE-proprietary form factor: it's a standard mini-SAS form factor. We don't want to add it as a ZTE-specific stacking form factor since it might be in use by other vendors for the same purpose.

@jeremystretch commented on GitHub (May 9, 2017): My point is that (as far as I can tell) this isn't a ZTE-proprietary form factor: it's a standard mini-SAS form factor. We don't want to add it as a ZTE-specific stacking form factor since it might be in use by other vendors for the same purpose.
adam commented 2025-12-29 16:26:58 +01:00
Author
Owner
Copy Link

@jeremystretch commented on GitHub (May 17, 2017):

It feels like we're starting to abuse the concept of network interface with regard to stacking interfaces. These are really proprietary connections that should be treated a bit differently from normal interfaces. I'm going to hold off on adding any more stacking types until we at least have a better idea where #99 is headed.

@jeremystretch commented on GitHub (May 17, 2017): It feels like we're starting to abuse the concept of network interface with regard to stacking interfaces. These are really proprietary connections that should be treated a bit differently from normal interfaces. I'm going to hold off on adding any more stacking types until we at least have a better idea where #99 is headed.
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#916
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?