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

Enhance device > rack assignment with "assign" #9198

New Issue
Open
opened 2025-12-29 20:46:50 +01:00 by adam · 9 comments
adam commented 2025-12-29 20:46:50 +01:00
Owner
Copy Link

Originally created by @dejantep on GitHub (Feb 5, 2024).

NetBox version

3.5.7

Feature type

Change to existing functionality

Proposed functionality

Open for "assigning device to rack" based on the same approach as when assigning ip-address.

Today, user has possibility to "add device" directly by clicking on available rack unit. That opens dialog to create device. It would be user friendly to also give user a chance to assign specific device to this rack unit. Users would choose from list of devices from particular site.

Use case

Having ability to assign device to rack by clicking on empty rack unit would improve usability of this feature by far.

Database changes

none

External dependencies

none

Originally created by @dejantep on GitHub (Feb 5, 2024). ### NetBox version 3.5.7 ### Feature type Change to existing functionality ### Proposed functionality ### Open for "assigning device to rack" based on the same approach as when assigning ip-address. Today, user has possibility to "add device" directly by clicking on available rack unit. That opens dialog to _create device_. It would be user friendly to also give user a chance to assign specific device to this rack unit. Users would choose from list of devices from particular site. ### Use case Having ability to assign device to rack by clicking on empty rack unit would improve usability of this feature by far. ### Database changes none ### External dependencies none
adam added the type: featurecomplexity: mediumnetboxstatus: backlog labels 2025-12-29 20:46:50 +01:00
adam commented 2025-12-29 20:46:51 +01:00
Author
Owner
Copy Link

@jeffgdotorg commented on GitHub (Feb 9, 2024):

This feature makes a lot of sense. Would you please map out the flow you imagine the user entering after clicking the "assign" control? Please include:

  • Concrete details about criteria for a device to be available for assignment
  • Ideas for how the available devices might be presented and the kinds of feedback the user should see; mock-ups would be nice even if they are very low-fi.
@jeffgdotorg commented on GitHub (Feb 9, 2024): This feature makes a lot of sense. Would you please map out the flow you imagine the user entering after clicking the "assign" control? Please include: - Concrete details about criteria for a device to be available for assignment - Ideas for how the available devices might be presented and the kinds of feedback the user should see; mock-ups would be nice even if they are very low-fi.
adam commented 2025-12-29 20:46:51 +01:00
Author
Owner
Copy Link

@dejantep commented on GitHub (Feb 10, 2024):

My intitial thought is function similar to ip-address assignment to interface. When you get to device > interface and click on button to add ip-adress your are presented with two options(tabs), create and assign.

This would be equally excellent approach for rack assignment.

  1. Go to site > rack and click on empty RU.
  2. Dialog opens with two options, create and assign.
    Create option is already at place and doesnt need any modfication
  3. If you choose assign you get two dropdown options
    a. First dropdown is list of sites
    b. Second dropdown is list of devices from that site
  4. Done

image

This also means that you would be able to select another site and move device from site to site BUT that could be an issue because of cables and connections. It could be prohibited with a warning saying "Remove all cables first"(preferred).
This is what you would do in real life situation.
OR
You could maybe limit dropdown to only that site where rack actually is.

@dejantep commented on GitHub (Feb 10, 2024): My intitial thought is function similar to ip-address assignment to interface. When you get to device > interface and click on button to add ip-adress your are presented with two options(tabs), create and assign. This would be equally excellent approach for rack assignment. 1. Go to site > rack and click on empty RU. 2. Dialog opens with two options, create and assign. Create option is already at place and doesnt need any modfication 4. If you choose assign you get two dropdown options a. First dropdown is list of sites b. Second dropdown is list of devices from that site 5. Done ![image](https://github.com/netbox-community/netbox/assets/71568639/be076b51-36a7-4b56-8139-4cf2d117ba5a) This also means that you would be able to select another site and move device from site to site BUT that could be an issue because of cables and connections. It could be prohibited with a warning saying "Remove all cables first"(preferred). This is what you would do in real life situation. OR You could maybe limit dropdown to only that site where rack actually is.
adam commented 2025-12-29 20:46:51 +01:00
Author
Owner
Copy Link

@xkilian commented on GitHub (Feb 10, 2024):

I would suggest having these four choices.

  1. Create, (as described).
  2. Assign, it should be scope limited to devices in the site.It should filter only to unracked devices.
  3. Reassign in rack, would permit moving devices from within the selected rack only (keeping all cables connected).
  4. Move from site could also be an additionnal fourth option, but should be scope limited to devices with No connections to any type of interface. A filter to select the site, should default to current site. This way the intent is clear between moving a device versus initial assign of a device.
@xkilian commented on GitHub (Feb 10, 2024): I would suggest having these four choices. 1. _Create_, (as described). 2. _Assign_, it should be scope limited to devices in the site.It should filter only to unracked devices. 3. _Reassign in rack_, would permit moving devices from within the selected rack only (keeping all cables connected). 4. _Move from site_ could also be an additionnal fourth option, but should be scope limited to devices with No connections to any type of interface. A filter to select the site, should default to current site. This way the intent is clear between moving a device versus initial assign of a device.
adam commented 2025-12-29 20:46:51 +01:00
Author
Owner
Copy Link

@dejantep commented on GitHub (Feb 11, 2024):

Those are some really good suggestions.
I personally would be content with Assign to begin with. And as you mentioned it makes sense to limit the scope to devices in the site that are non-racked.

@dejantep commented on GitHub (Feb 11, 2024): Those are some really good suggestions. I personally would be content with _Assign_ to begin with. And as you mentioned it makes sense to limit the scope to devices in the site that are non-racked.
adam commented 2025-12-29 20:46:52 +01:00
Author
Owner
Copy Link

@abhi1693 commented on GitHub (Feb 11, 2024):

Here is another implementation that was closed for device assignment https://github.com/netbox-community/netbox/pull/8876

@abhi1693 commented on GitHub (Feb 11, 2024): Here is another implementation that was closed for device assignment https://github.com/netbox-community/netbox/pull/8876
adam commented 2025-12-29 20:46:52 +01:00
Author
Owner
Copy Link

@dejantep commented on GitHub (Feb 12, 2024):

Hopefully they'll give it another shot. I belive this is relatively minor change but step forward for ease of use.

@dejantep commented on GitHub (Feb 12, 2024): Hopefully they'll give it another shot. I belive this is relatively minor change but step forward for ease of use.
adam commented 2025-12-29 20:46:52 +01:00
Author
Owner
Copy Link

@github-actions[bot] commented on GitHub (May 15, 2024):

This issue has been automatically marked as stale because it has not had recent activity. It will be closed if no further activity occurs. NetBox is governed by a small group of core maintainers which means not all opened issues may receive direct feedback. Do not attempt to circumvent this process by "bumping" the issue; doing so will result in its immediate closure and you may be barred from participating in any future discussions. Please see our contributing guide.

@github-actions[bot] commented on GitHub (May 15, 2024): This issue has been automatically marked as stale because it has not had recent activity. It will be closed if no further activity occurs. NetBox is governed by a small group of core maintainers which means not all opened issues may receive direct feedback. **Do not** attempt to circumvent this process by "bumping" the issue; doing so will result in its immediate closure and you may be barred from participating in any future discussions. Please see our [contributing guide](https://github.com/netbox-community/netbox/blob/develop/CONTRIBUTING.md).
adam commented 2025-12-29 20:46:52 +01:00
Author
Owner
Copy Link

@jeremystretch commented on GitHub (May 17, 2024):

I'm opening this for volunteers under the condition that only a maintainable implementation which does not deviate substantial from existing conventions will be accepted. Per my comment here we specifically want to avoid past mistakes involving snowflake views & templates which are difficult to maintain over time.

@jeremystretch commented on GitHub (May 17, 2024): I'm opening this for volunteers under the condition that only a maintainable implementation which does not deviate substantial from existing conventions will be accepted. Per my comment [here](https://github.com/netbox-community/netbox/pull/8876#issuecomment-1093069622) we specifically want to avoid past mistakes involving snowflake views & templates which are difficult to maintain over time.
adam commented 2025-12-29 20:46:53 +01:00
Author
Owner
Copy Link

@github-actions[bot] commented on GitHub (Aug 21, 2024):

This issue has been automatically marked as stale because it has not had recent activity. It will be closed if no further activity occurs. NetBox is governed by a small group of core maintainers which means not all opened issues may receive direct feedback. Do not attempt to circumvent this process by "bumping" the issue; doing so will result in its immediate closure and you may be barred from participating in any future discussions. Please see our contributing guide.

@github-actions[bot] commented on GitHub (Aug 21, 2024): This issue has been automatically marked as stale because it has not had recent activity. It will be closed if no further activity occurs. NetBox is governed by a small group of core maintainers which means not all opened issues may receive direct feedback. **Do not** attempt to circumvent this process by "bumping" the issue; doing so will result in its immediate closure and you may be barred from participating in any future discussions. Please see our [contributing guide](https://github.com/netbox-community/netbox/blob/develop/CONTRIBUTING.md).
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 complexity: medium netbox status: backlog 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#9198
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?