You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
IPAM IP-Address form could inherit tenant information from a prefix, especially in local subnets. I would propose an addition to prefixes that would define if information is inherited or not. Public IP-spaces would most likely not need this while when working with private address spaces it's common for the IP owner to be the same as the prefix.
This would reduce the amount of clicks required and be a good quality of life improvement. This would require a new boolean in the prefix table that is checked when "Add a new IP address" form is opened when adding an IP within the prefix. At t he moment VRF is inherited.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
E## Issue type
[X] Feature request
[ ] Bug report
[ ] Documentation
Environment
Description
IPAM IP-Address form could inherit tenant information from a prefix, especially in local subnets. I would propose an addition to prefixes that would define if information is inherited or not. Public IP-spaces would most likely not need this while when working with private address spaces it's common for the IP owner to be the same as the prefix.
This would reduce the amount of clicks required and be a good quality of life improvement. This would require a new boolean in the prefix table that is checked when "Add a new IP address" form is opened when adding an IP within the prefix. At t he moment VRF is inherited.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: