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

Utilization of parent range not correct, if sub-range marked as marked utilized #9879

New Issue
Closed
opened 2025-12-29 21:23:54 +01:00 by adam · 4 comments
adam commented 2025-12-29 21:23:54 +01:00
Owner
Copy Link

Originally created by @blindzero on GitHub (Jun 21, 2024).

Originally assigned to: @jeremystretch on GitHub.

Deployment Type

Self-hosted

NetBox Version

v4.0.5

Python Version

3.12

Steps to Reproduce

  1. Create an IP Range with prefix-mask /23
  2. Create an sub IP Range within the parent range with prefix-mask /24
  3. Mark sub IP range as "is utilized"
  4. Go to ranges overview

Expected Behavior

Mark 50% of parent-range as marked.

The use-case is following:

  • sub-range is a "self-service" range we do not manage or control at all --> is utilized --> 100% used (from our perspective).
  • parent-range can only be used 50% from our perspective

Observed Behavior

-> parent IP ragne is utilized 0%, while sub-range is 100%

image

Originally created by @blindzero on GitHub (Jun 21, 2024). Originally assigned to: @jeremystretch on GitHub. ### Deployment Type Self-hosted ### NetBox Version v4.0.5 ### Python Version 3.12 ### Steps to Reproduce 1. Create an IP Range with prefix-mask `/23` 2. Create an sub IP Range within the parent range with prefix-mask `/24` 3. Mark sub IP range as "is utilized" 4. Go to ranges overview ### Expected Behavior Mark 50% of parent-range as marked. The use-case is following: * sub-range is a "self-service" range we do not manage or control at all --> is utilized --> 100% used (from our perspective). * parent-range can only be used 50% from our perspective ### Observed Behavior -> parent IP ragne is utilized 0%, while sub-range is 100% ![image](https://github.com/netbox-community/netbox/assets/13959569/770c1564-d489-4968-990f-3bc390ee4eab)
adam added the type: bugstatus: revisions needed labels 2025-12-29 21:23:54 +01:00
adam closed this issue 2025-12-29 21:23:54 +01:00
adam commented 2025-12-29 21:23:55 +01:00
Author
Owner
Copy Link

@Chiniquy commented on GitHub (Jun 21, 2024):

Have you tried putting the parent prefix as "Container"?

@Chiniquy commented on GitHub (Jun 21, 2024): Have you tried putting the parent prefix as "Container"?
adam commented 2025-12-29 21:23:56 +01:00
Author
Owner
Copy Link

@jeremystretch commented on GitHub (Jun 21, 2024):

Your reproduction steps indicate the creation of IP ranges, but your screenshot shows prefixes; these are two very different types of records. Please revise your issue to clearly indicate the steps your are taking to reproduce the reported behavior.

@jeremystretch commented on GitHub (Jun 21, 2024): Your reproduction steps indicate the creation of IP ranges, but your screenshot shows prefixes; these are two very different types of records. Please revise your issue to clearly indicate the steps your are taking to reproduce the reported behavior.
adam commented 2025-12-29 21:23:56 +01:00
Author
Owner
Copy Link

@blindzero commented on GitHub (Jun 25, 2024):

Sorry, I meant the paar in the Prefixes, filled by the ranges.
It seems that the bar is now updated. Is that maybe some asynchronous housekeeping job?

@blindzero commented on GitHub (Jun 25, 2024): Sorry, I meant the paar in the Prefixes, filled by the ranges. It seems that the bar is now updated. Is that maybe some asynchronous housekeeping job?
adam commented 2025-12-29 21:23:56 +01:00
Author
Owner
Copy Link

@jeremystretch commented on GitHub (Jun 25, 2024):

Is that maybe some asynchronous housekeeping job?

No, the utilization is calculated live.

@jeremystretch commented on GitHub (Jun 25, 2024): > Is that maybe some asynchronous housekeeping job? No, the utilization is calculated live.
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: revisions needed 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#9879
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?