Why are devices that are connected to front or rear ports no longer displayed in the connection column of the interfaces?

[julianstolp]

This was a good feature to see the connected devices on the switch interfaces, even if they were open front ports. As is often the case in office buildings, for example.
Is there a reason for this change? I dont see why this would be removed.

[candlerb]

There are two columns, "Link Peers" and "Connection": use the "Configure Table" button to make them visibile if they are not.

"Link Peers" shows where the cable immediately goes (e.g. to a front port). "Connection" shows the far-end interface, if there is a complete end-to-end path.

[julianstolp]

Yes I know, but why is a complete path, a "Connection" only interface to interface? A path could be completed by any cabled connection it should not matter if it is a front, rear or interface port. I would define the connection as connected device at the far end, doesn't matter which interface type.

[DanSheps]

That is not a complete path.

Lets say you have the following:

• A (24port Switch)
• B (24 Port Switch)
• C (24 Port Patch Panel)
• D (24 Port Patch Panel)

What you have is this:

[A:1] <> [C:FP1 -- C:RP1] <> [D:RP1 -- D:FP1]

A complete path would be:

[A:1] <> [C:FP1 -- C:RP1] <> [D:RP1 -- D:FP1] <> [B:1]

A complete path is a cable path that starts and ends on a cable endpoint (Interface, Power Port, Power Outlet, Console Port, Console Server Port, Circuit Termination, etc).

This is why you don't see anything under connection

[julianstolp]

Yes, I know the definition, but I don't understand why it is kept so narrow. In my opinion, every device at the far end, regardless of the interface type combination, is a connection. Should I discuss this in an FR?