Complete links between two switchs

[François Maytain]

Hi everyone,

First I would like to thank everyone participating around Netbox, it's a great product !

I'm using it from several years now, with a lot of success...

I'm on the new 2.5beta2 version, and I try to represent the following schema inside Netbox :

switchA SFP port 28 <-> patch panel A, LSH ports 1&2 <-> patch panel B, LSH ports 5&6 <-> switchB SFP port 24

I have already create a device type "patch panel", but for now I didn't figure the correct way to create the front and rear ports to correctly connect 1 SFP port (duplex) from the switch to 2 LSH ports on the patch panel.

Maybe there is someone that can help me ?

Thanks in advance for your answer !

FM

[Brian Candler]

The model is not a full fibre-tracing model, I'm afraid.  You can break out one rear port to multiple front ports, but not vice versa.

If you can work within the limitations, you could treat your patch panel as duplex all the way: that is, have ports called "1-2", "3-4", "5-6" etc, where each represents a pair of LSH ports.  But this won't work if you're also using single fibre paths.

Now, here's the really horrible and tedious way.

* Create a device type "lch-to-2lsh"

* Add rear port: Name LC, Type LC, Positions 2

* Add front port: Name LSH[1-2], Type LSH, link to LC:1 and LC:2

* Make an instance of this adapter, let's call it "adapt1"

* Make a connection from switchA (SFP interface) to adapt1 rear port (LC)

* Make a connection from adapt1 front port LSH:1 to fibre panel front port 1

* Make a connection from adapt1 front port LSH:2 to fibre panel front port 2

Repeat all this for the other end.  This assumes your fibre panel rear ports are connected together, of course.  (In my case I made a device type with 1 rear port of type MPO, linked to 24 front ports of type LSH.  Then I could join the two panels with a single MPO to MPO connection)

Unfortunately, even if you do all this, you'll find that Netbox's fibre tracing does not handle the bifurcation of connections like this.  When you trace the path which includes a rear-to-front path, it only traces the first leg:

This may be good enough, because at least you can *record* the connections.  I might raise an issue for it anyway; but really what you want here is a *cable* with multiple connectors at one end, not a ficticious adapter.

In my opinion, the UI is still way, way too painful to do this for real.  And note that in the example above, I've assumed you've connected an SFP "interface" directly to an LC "rear port".  If you were being accurate, you'd also add a device of type "LX SFP", which has an SFP rear port and LC front port.

And also you have to give all these device types a rack height (e.g. 1U) and depth (full/not full), even thought you're not going to rack them.  Having a rack height of "unrackable" would be an improvement there.

[Brian Candler]

I created an issue for tracing multiple paths: https://github.com/digitalocean/netbox/issues/2633

I didn't create a separate one for multi-headed cables, but I mentioned it in that one.

[Brian Candler]

Also: I found that setting the Height (U) to "0" in the Device Type works fine for making unrackable devices.

[Igor Stojnov]

True... I've used this setting for blade servers which reside inside a chassis and also for various network devices we have sitting on trays inside the racks. 

On Fri, Nov 30, 2018 at 5:39 PM Brian Candler <b.ca...@pobox.com> wrote:

Also: I found that setting the Height (U) to "0" in the Device Type works fine for making unrackable devices.

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "NetBox" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to netbox-discus...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to netbox-...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/netbox-discuss/3b2d4a67-d1f9-4105-840a-8434bc1b3af3%40googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.