Netbox: Bulk connect front/rear ports

[deku-m]

Environment

• Python version: 3.5.2
• NetBox version: 2.5.5

Proposed Functionality

Normally front/rear ports match so port 1 on front is same as rear port 1 at the same "device" cq. patch panel. As we created front and rear ports on a patch panel So these ports could match each other to fast connect front to rear in a patch panel.

It could also be great if its possible to bulk connect them to different panel. For example we have a panel named M18-M17. Which mean in rack M18 there is a panel towards M17 with fiber with 24 ports (pre-patched). This could also help for port-bundeling.

Use Case

On the same "patch panel". Match port 1 from front to 1 from rear. 1:1, 2:2, etc.
Or provide a bulk connect. With selecting all and let them connect to each other to same panel or different panel to front or rear.

Database Changes

N/A

External Dependencies

N/A

[jeremystretch]

This needs much more detail to be actionable. What is the workflow being proposed? What new views and forms would be introduced?

[tb-killa]

For the sake of simplicity,
in the bulk-mode there should be an option to 1:1 connect all ports of a patch panel to another.
You Start on your Selected Patchpanel and could select on "edit" in the new view your counterpart.
After selecting and proceeding both a connected 1:1.

Maybe some Sort of Extension of "Closes #2854: Enable bulk editing of pass-through ports" ?

Hint: The counterpart should only be selectable if there isn´t a connection available on this device.

[candlerb]

I support this idea, but add it's not always 1:1, e.g. you may be crossing over pairs.

Simple idea: under "Cable" have a "Bulk add" page.

• Device A: ... (select)
• Port type A: Rearport (dropdown)
• Port range A: PO[1-12]
• Device B: ... (select)
• Port type B: Rearport (dropdown)
• Port range B: PO[2,1,4,3,6,5,8,7,10,9,12,11]
• Cable type, length, colour etc (as normal)

You could also do it from the device page: with multiple interfaces to be selected, click a "Bulk connect..." button and it can go to the same page, but pre-populate the device A, port type A and range A - the latter as a simple list e.g. [PO1,PO2,PO3,...]

[tb-killa]

Yes this is a great solution.
Let's use some regex to build the connections.

I use the term of 1:1 because it's easier to implement.
I think it would be also okay if you get automatic build 1:1 connections and modify them later by hand themselve.

[candlerb]

Interesting, regex matching against the actual interface names on a device is possible.

But I think it would be simpler and less confusing to use the interface name generation patterns that already exist, e.g. when bulking adding interfaces.

In the case of 1:1 it would be the same but simpler than the example I gave.

• Port range A: PO[1-12]
• Port range B: PO[1-12]

Modifying connections is harder than you think, because there's not a way to swap connections; indeed there's not even a way to change one endpoint of a cable at the moment.

You would have to delete two connections and create two new connections, which is worse than not having bulk upload in the first place.

[tb-killa]

Yes your right, I test them...
I agree with to use the interface name generation patterns that already exist.

[deku-m]

Sorry for late reaction. Think the above comments already give a good view/idea.
My view was almost the same but didnt included the multiple connections / cross connections from front port to rear. We don`t use that for patchpanels. As they mainly are 1on1 connection.

The most common way in my view for patchpanels to implement this is to link the front / rear panel to the same port numbers. 1/1, 2/2, 3/3. So selecting front ports and match / connect them with the rear.
If you think about it. If you create a front panel also the same rear panel is created with same numbering as front so you can also create it on the back-end then so that they are linked. Then you don`t have to bulk edit the front to rear connections in my opinion.

[candlerb]

If you correctly model the Front to Rear port connections in the Device Type object, then you should get them created automatically whenever you create a Device instance of that type.

Furthermore, it's already possible to create the Front to Rear connections in bulk in the Device Type.

• Add Rear Ports, give a range (e.g. R[1-24])
• Add Front Ports, give a similar range (e.g. F[1-24]). At the bottom you'll see a list of rear ports, "R1:1" to "R24:1". Select them all (click on first, shift-click on last)

You'll find you have 24 front ports, all linked 1:1 to the 24 rear ports.

Where I would find the real value in bulk-add would be in connecting between two different devices, in particular:

• Range of rear ports on device A to range of rear ports on device B
• Range of front ports on device A to range of front ports on device B
• Range of interfaces on device A to range of front ports on device B

And as described before, I'd like to be able to do this with crossovers rather than just 1:1.

[deku-m]

@candlerb
It is correct that they are linked in the device type but they arent connected for cabling.
Yes on front ports i see that its a 1on1 relation. But as soon as you check it in the rack its not connected. So its not a fully path with connected device to patchpanel front to back to another device.

[candlerb]

Sorry, I think I am not understanding something.

You can create a cable between device X to the front port on device Y, and you can create a cable between the rear port on device Y to device Z.

The internal connection from the front port on Y to the rear port of device Y is part of the device itself. Whenever you add a front port to a device, you must associate it with a rear port, and that represents the internal connection.

In the original post you said:

As we created front and rear ports on a patch panel So these ports could match each other to fast connect front to rear in a patch panel.

But it is impossible to create a front port without connecting it to a rear port. Netbox won't let you create an isolated front port.

It could also be great if its possible to bulk connect them to different panel

So that's a separate issue: if I understand, you want to connect rear ports 1-24 on panel X to rear ports 1-24 on panel Y, without creating 24 separate cables.

That's a reasonable request. There are some proposals above for this. The same could also apply to interface-to-interface or interface-to-front port connections. Those are all "cables". But it doesn't apply to front-to-rear port connections within the same device; those are not cables.

[golec83]

Hi,
I would like to add my request to bulk join rear ports between different patch panels. Thanks!

[rogeriosims]

Sorry, I'm new here and in github.

How is the development of this function?

Connect bulk ports between different devices.

Thanks!

[tiffanykaczmarek]

Hey there!
I have encountered the same issue, that's why I decided to develop a tool to bulk connect rear ports between different devices on my own. If you'd like, you can take a look at my project and maybe it can help a few of you out there, until netbox implements the feature.
With best regards, Tiffany Kaczmarek

[lmgonzalezl]

Proposed workflow
Visually I see it as follows:

I would keep the current format to select the rear ports but with the option to select both side a and side b and add a pop-up window that allows you to choose cable type, length, color, etc ... this would add it in a table.

Select rear ports on both sides

Pop-up window

Table

What happens if some of the rear ports are already connected, or one panel has more than the other?

As validation is done this will not be a problem because connected ports already are disabled from the selection.

[m384wwn]

Mapping the front to back or back to front descriptions would be a huge timesaver. Along with he bulk edit select feature mentioned here https://github.com/netbox-community/netbox/issues/2854#issuecomment-461317108