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

Add VLANs & VLAN Groups to related objects of site groups #9352

New Issue
Closed
opened 2025-12-29 20:48:55 +01:00 by adam · 4 comments
adam commented 2025-12-29 20:48:55 +01:00
Owner
Copy Link

Originally created by @PaulR282 on GitHub (Mar 14, 2024).

NetBox version

v3.7.4

Feature type

Change to existing functionality

Proposed functionality

Add VLAN Groups and VLANs to the related objects of site groups.

Use case

Since VLANs and VLAN Groups can be assigned to site groups, they should appear in the related objects of the site groups.
Current situation:
image

Database changes

No response

External dependencies

No response

Originally created by @PaulR282 on GitHub (Mar 14, 2024). ### NetBox version v3.7.4 ### Feature type Change to existing functionality ### Proposed functionality Add VLAN Groups and VLANs to the related objects of site groups. ### Use case Since VLANs and VLAN Groups can be assigned to site groups, they should appear in the related objects of the site groups. Current situation: ![image](https://github.com/netbox-community/netbox/assets/47193860/e75f436a-c256-471d-b7b6-f6d7ed711451) ### Database changes _No response_ ### External dependencies _No response_
adam added the type: featurestatus: needs ownerpending closurecomplexity: low labels 2025-12-29 20:48:55 +01:00
adam closed this issue 2025-12-29 20:48:55 +01:00
adam commented 2025-12-29 20:48:56 +01:00
Author
Owner
Copy Link

@jeremystretch commented on GitHub (Apr 3, 2024):

Since VLANs and VLAN Groups can be assigned to site groups

VLANs cannot be assigned to site groups. VLANs can be assigned to site or to VLAN groups, and a VLAN group may be scoped to a site group. But why did you single out site groups in your proposal? VLAN groups can also be assigned to regions, sites, locations, cluster groups, and clusters: Only the site view currently included VLAN groups under related objects. We should be consistent.

@jeremystretch commented on GitHub (Apr 3, 2024): > Since VLANs and VLAN Groups can be assigned to site groups VLANs cannot be assigned to site groups. VLANs can be assigned to site or to _VLAN_ groups, and a VLAN group may be scoped to a site group. But why did you single out site groups in your proposal? VLAN groups can also be assigned to regions, sites, locations, cluster groups, and clusters: Only the site view currently included VLAN groups under related objects. We should be consistent.
adam commented 2025-12-29 20:48:56 +01:00
Author
Owner
Copy Link

@PaulR282 commented on GitHub (Apr 3, 2024):

Since VLANs and VLAN Groups can be assigned to site groups

VLANs cannot be assigned to site groups. VLANs can be assigned to site or to VLAN groups, and a VLAN group may be scoped to a site group. But why did you single out site groups in your proposal? VLAN groups can also be assigned to regions, sites, locations, cluster groups, and clusters: Only the site view currently included VLAN groups under related objects. We should be consistent.

Yes, that is right, my bad. So the functionality should be adding VLAN Groups to the related objects of site groups, regions, site, locations, cluster groups and clusters.

@PaulR282 commented on GitHub (Apr 3, 2024): > > Since VLANs and VLAN Groups can be assigned to site groups > > VLANs cannot be assigned to site groups. VLANs can be assigned to site or to _VLAN_ groups, and a VLAN group may be scoped to a site group. But why did you single out site groups in your proposal? VLAN groups can also be assigned to regions, sites, locations, cluster groups, and clusters: Only the site view currently included VLAN groups under related objects. We should be consistent. Yes, that is right, my bad. So the functionality should be adding VLAN Groups to the related objects of site groups, regions, site, locations, cluster groups and clusters.
adam commented 2025-12-29 20:48:56 +01:00
Author
Owner
Copy Link

@github-actions[bot] commented on GitHub (Aug 20, 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 20, 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 20:48:57 +01:00
Author
Owner
Copy Link

@github-actions[bot] commented on GitHub (Sep 19, 2024):

This issue has been automatically closed due to lack of activity. In an effort to reduce noise, please do not comment any further. Note that the core maintainers may elect to reopen this issue at a later date if deemed necessary.

@github-actions[bot] commented on GitHub (Sep 19, 2024): This issue has been automatically closed due to lack of activity. In an effort to reduce noise, please do not comment any further. Note that the core maintainers may elect to reopen this issue at a later date if deemed necessary.
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: low pending closure status: needs owner 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#9352
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?