Python version:
NetBox version:
Jeremy,
I am honestly not sure if this a bug or should be feature request. I noticed that as I get more IPs into our setup, that a prefix where two VRFs meet, do NOT show all IPs.
For example, in a /30 routed linked between me and a provider the .1 IP would be a part of one BGP ASN and the .2 IP would be a part of another BGP ASN. Not sure what I should do to account for that.
VRFs and ASNs are entirely separate concepts. Prefixes and IPs are grouped by VRF; as in the real world, each prefix or IP can belong to only one VRF (or the global table). The assignment of ASNs has no effect on this.
They are entirely separate concepts, sure. A VRF is just a organization of routes in a routing table.
"As in the real world" .... nice jab thanks.
Umm but multiple IPs, within a given prefix, can be members of different VRFs. A /24 could a 10 IPs in 10 different VRFs. Which is where my question came up. Several /30's in different VRFs within the same /24 prefix.
No idea why I mentioned AS, they had nothing to do with my train of thought.
Hi,
I'm evaluating Netbox 2.2.2 (I think about migrating from Racktables to Netbox), and I have the same issue/request.
I have many prefixes that have /31 or /32 IPs in differents VRFs, and I can't find a way to fit this into Netbox.
I think having to associate a prefix to a VRF is a bit rigid. Maybe adding an option like "Shared across multiple VRFs" would solve this.
@jeremystretch: Can you re-open this?
Most helpful comment
Hi,
I'm evaluating Netbox 2.2.2 (I think about migrating from Racktables to Netbox), and I have the same issue/request.
I have many prefixes that have /31 or /32 IPs in differents VRFs, and I can't find a way to fit this into Netbox.
I think having to associate a prefix to a VRF is a bit rigid. Maybe adding an option like "Shared across multiple VRFs" would solve this.