Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Add support for provider networks #454

Open
heiko-ma opened this issue Feb 6, 2024 · 4 comments
Open

Add support for provider networks #454

heiko-ma opened this issue Feb 6, 2024 · 4 comments
Labels
type: feature Request for new feature or change to existing feature

Comments

@heiko-ma
Copy link

heiko-ma commented Feb 6, 2024

NetBox version

v3.7.1

Topology Views version

v3.9.0

Feature type

New functionality

Proposed functionality

Netbox implemented provider networks a while back. With them you can connect multiple circuits to a "backend network" for example MPLS. Currently, only physical circuit terminations are supported.

Use case

It would be useful to have a this possibility to quickly display which sites are connected to a single provider network.
In our company we are using a MPLS service from our ISP and nearly every site is connected. Currently I'm using a workaround by creating a dummy device and connecting the terminations to a interface.

External dependencies

No response

@heiko-ma heiko-ma added the type: feature Request for new feature or change to existing feature label Feb 6, 2024
@alryaz
Copy link
Contributor

alryaz commented Feb 13, 2024

I also stumbled upon this issue today. I've made a dirty adjustment to the codebase to implement this minimally (without coordinate saving etc.), but I will format my code and will make a pull request with all the required migrations by Saturday.

It appears some of the code is already there just waiting to be used.

@mattieserver
Copy link
Collaborator

Hi @alryaz ,

Do you know when you will be able to open the PR?

@dreng
Copy link
Collaborator

dreng commented Feb 24, 2024

I fully understand that this is just as much a part of the topology as power feeds and circuits. This said, I personally don't like all of these features at all. We are actually only operating in a device context. All the types mentioned are not devices which leads to workarounds and workarounds for workarounds.

@alryaz I'd be happy to assign you to this FR. But to be honest, it's not worth anything to have half of an implementation. This would only lead to more bug reports that forces us to implement the rest of the needed code.

@ibuclaw
Copy link
Contributor

ibuclaw commented Mar 27, 2024

I guess the ask is to do the same as what Ntmap implements https://github.com/den-it/ntmap

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
type: feature Request for new feature or change to existing feature
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

5 participants