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 etherchannel interface type #105

Closed
markve-sa opened this issue Jun 29, 2016 · 4 comments
Closed

Add etherchannel interface type #105

markve-sa opened this issue Jun 29, 2016 · 4 comments
Milestone

Comments

@markve-sa
Copy link

Please may we be able to create an etherchannel interface type with the ability to add physical interfaces to them

Amazing work so far. Most comprehensive IPAM I've seen

@mdlayher mdlayher changed the title [Feature] Etherchannel Add etherchannel interface type Jun 30, 2016
@ryanmerolle
Copy link
Contributor

We should think about this carefully to include things like MLAG.

@rdujardin
Copy link

An idea : simply add a boolean field "lag" to Interface.
Interfaces connected to a lag interface can either be lag too which means a true connection between two lags, or not be lag which means they belong to the lag.
It's simple, it allows to point at interfaces no matter lagged or not (compatible with #267 for instance), it allows MLAG, etc.

@specialcircumstances
Copy link

specialcircumstances commented Nov 6, 2016

I'd say that this needs to be a seperate model, in that it needs to have a relationship to it's component interfaces. I like the LAG "name" as it's generic, and is used with many platforms. I'd suggest fields would need to include LAG type (e.g. LACP, PAGP, "Vanilla Etherchannel", VPC, VPC+, etc...).
For best use, it should be possible to exist over multiple devices, which is common now.
To that end, perhaps it needs to be a new model, with a new ForeignKey (rather than a boolean) looking up to it in the Interface model. I think this would work in all cases, although there would be the (very useful) need to sanity check the membership.
The difficulty might be in representing this in the device Interface list, as it's a different table. That said, looking at the Device view, a LAG box could sit above the Interfaces box?

@specialcircumstances
Copy link

Yay :)

@jeremystretch jeremystretch added this to the v1.9 milestone Mar 17, 2017
lampwins pushed a commit to lampwins/netbox that referenced this issue Oct 13, 2017
* Initial work on interface groups

* Simplify to a single LAG form factor

* Correct interface serializer

* Allow for bulk editing of interface LAG

* Additional LAG interface validation

* Fixed API tests
@lock lock bot locked as resolved and limited conversation to collaborators Jan 18, 2020
Sign up for free to subscribe to this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in.
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

5 participants