starred/netbox
1
0
Fork 0
mirror of https://github.com/netbox-community/netbox.git synced 2026-01-13 22:03:32 +01:00
Code Issues 273 Packages Projects Releases 10 Wiki Activity

Wrong trace when multiple rear(multi position) cable. #9842

New Issue
Closed
opened 2025-12-29 21:23:27 +01:00 by adam · 3 comments
adam commented 2025-12-29 21:23:27 +01:00
Owner
Copy Link

Originally created by @joaolucasmacedo on GitHub (Jun 14, 2024).

Deployment Type

Self-hosted

NetBox Version

v4.0.5

Python Version

3.10

Steps to Reproduce

  1. Create 2 devices with 2 module bays each. Each device is a fiber patch panel capable to accept fiber splice cassettes.
  2. Create a module type (a fiber cassette) with 1 rear port with 12 position (to represent a fiber cable splice for 12 fibers), and 12 front ports (to represent 6 LC connectors).
  3. Add 2 cassettes as modules on devices.
  4. Connect 2 cables on both rear ports on devices. As 2 12 fiber cables connecting 2 fiber patch panels.
  5. Connect any regular device's interface using one front (LC) port from one cassette and other from other cassette. Think if you need to use a pair of fibers to connect 2 switches thorough these 2 fiber patch panels but using different rear cables.

Expected Behavior

To trace the 2 interfaces properly.

Observed Behavior

It says "Asymmetric path!" showing a non related switch's interface.

See 2 fiber patch panels with 2 cassettes each, "DIO X1" and "DIO X2".
Each cassette gives a 12 position rear port and 12 LC front ports.
The patch panels are connected by 2 12 fiber cables on both cassettes.
image

Lets connect 2 switches, each on a different patch panel.
image

The image above shows a switch "SW X1A" interface connecting to 2 LC ports, and the switch on the other side is using the same ports on the other patch panel by the same interface "GigabitEthernet1/0/4".
image

The trace is not completed and the interfaces can't see each other.

image

Furthermore, if I use other single LC front port on each patch panel to connect interface "GigabitEthernet1/0/1" it show up on "Gi1/0/4" trace saying "Asymmetric Path!", and Gi1/0/1 is shown as Gi1/0/4 peer.

image

image

Is I delete the cables connecting both Gi1/0/1 interfaces and do the same with any other interfaces this last behavior does not show up.

Originally created by @joaolucasmacedo on GitHub (Jun 14, 2024). ### Deployment Type Self-hosted ### NetBox Version v4.0.5 ### Python Version 3.10 ### Steps to Reproduce 1. Create 2 devices with 2 module bays each. Each device is a fiber patch panel capable to accept fiber splice cassettes. 2. Create a module type (a fiber cassette) with 1 rear port with 12 position (to represent a fiber cable splice for 12 fibers), and 12 front ports (to represent 6 LC connectors). 3. Add 2 cassettes as modules on devices. 4. Connect 2 cables on both rear ports on devices. As 2 12 fiber cables connecting 2 fiber patch panels. 5. Connect any regular device's interface using one front (LC) port from one cassette and other from other cassette. Think if you need to use a pair of fibers to connect 2 switches thorough these 2 fiber patch panels but using different rear cables. ### Expected Behavior To trace the 2 interfaces properly. ### Observed Behavior It says "Asymmetric path!" showing a non related switch's interface. See 2 fiber patch panels with 2 cassettes each, "DIO X1" and "DIO X2". Each cassette gives a 12 position rear port and 12 LC front ports. The patch panels are connected by 2 12 fiber cables on both cassettes. ![image](https://github.com/netbox-community/netbox/assets/66760118/af70aab3-1223-4aae-815d-f17132b5c2e5) Lets connect 2 switches, each on a different patch panel. ![image](https://github.com/netbox-community/netbox/assets/66760118/a7285435-a3e5-427c-b3b8-2308ab2d529f) The image above shows a switch "SW X1A" interface connecting to 2 LC ports, and the switch on the other side is using the same ports on the other patch panel by the same interface "GigabitEthernet1/0/4". ![image](https://github.com/netbox-community/netbox/assets/66760118/cc918e04-be65-48af-b0a0-d83af4883e1a) The trace is not completed and the interfaces can't see each other. ![image](https://github.com/netbox-community/netbox/assets/66760118/ad6ea2bf-1aae-4f3f-92e2-5f0aab321d21) Furthermore, if I use other single LC front port on each patch panel to connect interface "GigabitEthernet1/0/**1**" it show up on "Gi1/0/4" trace saying "Asymmetric Path!", and Gi1/0/1 is shown as Gi1/0/4 peer. ![image](https://github.com/netbox-community/netbox/assets/66760118/8ececd35-ad6f-4e4d-9e5c-c347e8e53e75) ![image](https://github.com/netbox-community/netbox/assets/66760118/0deb94de-c5a9-4d3a-b706-36eff491e784) Is I delete the cables connecting both Gi1/0/1 interfaces and do the same with any other interfaces this last behavior does not show up.
adam added the type: bug label 2025-12-29 21:23:27 +01:00
adam closed this issue 2025-12-29 21:23:27 +01:00
adam commented 2025-12-29 21:23:28 +01:00
Author
Owner
Copy Link

@arthanson commented on GitHub (Jun 17, 2024):

@joaolucasmacedo The repro is a bit hard to follow, so I'm not sure if doing exactly the same as you. If possible please make the repro steps as simple as possible, something like:

  1. Create Device "A1"
  2. Create Module "M1" on Device A1...

Below is what i think your repro is:

  • Create 1 Device Type
    • CommScope DIO
    • 2 rear ports (RP[1-2]
    • 24 front ports (FP[1-2]-[1-6][A-B])
  • Create 2 patch panel devices (DIO, named DIO X1 and DIO X2)
  • Connect DIO X1:RP1 to DIO X2:RP1 and DIO X1:RP2 to DIO X2:RP2
  • Create 2 switches (Name SW X1A and SW X2A
  • Connect SW X1A G1/0/1 to DIO X1:FP1-1A and DIO X1:FP2-1A
  • Connect SW X2A G1/0/1 to DIO X2:FP1-1A and DIO X2:FP2-1A
  • View the trace

The following was tested:
https://demo.netbox.dev/dcim/devices/126/interfaces/
https://demo.netbox.dev/dcim/devices/125/interfaces/
https://demo.netbox.dev/dcim/devices/123/
https://demo.netbox.dev/dcim/devices/124/
https://demo.netbox.dev/dcim/interfaces/1887/trace/

The trace looks good, I think so I'm not sure if you are doing something beyond that or special. Can you please double-check and if still encountering the issue try to post a simpler repro steps.

@arthanson commented on GitHub (Jun 17, 2024): @joaolucasmacedo The repro is a bit hard to follow, so I'm not sure if doing exactly the same as you. If possible please make the repro steps as simple as possible, something like: 1. Create Device "A1" 2. Create Module "M1" on Device A1... Below is what i think your repro is: - Create 1 Device Type - CommScope DIO - 2 rear ports (RP[1-2] - 24 front ports (FP[1-2]-[1-6][A-B]) - Create 2 patch panel devices (DIO, named DIO X1 and DIO X2) - Connect DIO X1:RP1 to DIO X2:RP1 and DIO X1:RP2 to DIO X2:RP2 - Create 2 switches (Name SW X1A and SW X2A - Connect SW X1A G1/0/1 to DIO X1:FP1-1A and DIO X1:FP2-1A - Connect SW X2A G1/0/1 to DIO X2:FP1-1A and DIO X2:FP2-1A - View the trace The following was tested: https://demo.netbox.dev/dcim/devices/126/interfaces/ https://demo.netbox.dev/dcim/devices/125/interfaces/ https://demo.netbox.dev/dcim/devices/123/ https://demo.netbox.dev/dcim/devices/124/ https://demo.netbox.dev/dcim/interfaces/1887/trace/ The trace looks good, I think so I'm not sure if you are doing something beyond that or special. Can you please double-check and if still encountering the issue try to post a simpler repro steps.
adam commented 2025-12-29 21:23:28 +01:00
Author
Owner
Copy Link

@joaolucasmacedo commented on GitHub (Jun 18, 2024):

@arthanson I tested many scenarios and now I found it looks like a bug. I did the steps as you said and everything looks fine, but then I tried using modules rather than direct rear ports.
You can see at:
https://demo.netbox.dev/dcim/interfaces/928/trace/

Below is what i think the repro is:
Create 1 MODULE Type
Cassete G2 12fo 6 LC
1 rear port splice {module}
12 front ports (LC port - splice {module} - [1-6][A-B])
Create 2 patch panel devices (DIO, named DIO X1 and DIO X2) with 2 module bays (splice [1-2])
Add 2 modules to each patch panels
Connect DIO X1:splice 1 to DIO X2:splice 1 and DIO X1:splice 2 to DIO X2:splice 2
Create 2 switches (Name SW X1A and SW X2A)
Connect SW X1A G1/0/1 to DIO X1:"LC port - splice 1 - 1A" and DIO X1:"LC port - splice 1 - 1B"
Connect SW X2A G1/0/1 to DIO X2:"LC port - splice 1 - 1A" and DIO X2:"LC port - splice 1 - 1B"
View the trace
Now,
Connect SW X1A G1/0/2 to DIO X1:"LC port - splice 1 - 6B" and DIO X1:"LC port - splice 2 - 1A"
Connect SW X2A G1/0/2 to DIO X2:"LC port - splice 1 - 6B" and DIO X2:"LC port - splice 2 - 1A"

If it is not clear, please let me know.

image

@joaolucasmacedo commented on GitHub (Jun 18, 2024): @arthanson I tested many scenarios and now I found it looks like a bug. I did the steps as you said and everything looks fine, but then I tried using modules rather than direct rear ports. You can see at: https://demo.netbox.dev/dcim/interfaces/928/trace/ Below is what i think the repro is: Create 1 MODULE Type Cassete G2 12fo 6 LC 1 rear port splice {module} 12 front ports (LC port - splice {module} - [1-6][A-B]) Create 2 patch panel devices (DIO, named DIO X1 and DIO X2) with 2 module bays (splice [1-2]) Add 2 modules to each patch panels Connect DIO X1:splice 1 to DIO X2:splice 1 and DIO X1:splice 2 to DIO X2:splice 2 Create 2 switches (Name SW X1A and SW X2A) Connect SW X1A G1/0/1 to DIO X1:"LC port - splice 1 - 1A" and DIO X1:"LC port - splice 1 - 1B" Connect SW X2A G1/0/1 to DIO X2:"LC port - splice 1 - 1A" and DIO X2:"LC port - splice 1 - 1B" View the trace Now, Connect SW X1A G1/0/2 to DIO X1:"LC port - splice 1 - 6B" and DIO X1:"LC port - splice 2 - 1A" Connect SW X2A G1/0/2 to DIO X2:"LC port - splice 1 - 6B" and DIO X2:"LC port - splice 2 - 1A" If it is not clear, please let me know. ![image](https://github.com/netbox-community/netbox/assets/66760118/6f567852-7a4c-48ac-8349-97a015801096)
adam commented 2025-12-29 21:23:28 +01:00
Author
Owner
Copy Link

@DanSheps commented on GitHub (Jun 18, 2024):

Duplicate of #10602

@DanSheps commented on GitHub (Jun 18, 2024): Duplicate of #10602
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 type: bug
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#9842
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?