Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

improve Interfaces #28

Open
wants to merge 2 commits into
base: main
Choose a base branch
from
Open

improve Interfaces #28

wants to merge 2 commits into from

Conversation

BeArchiTek
Copy link
Contributor

  • Replace "legacy" Nodes InterfaceL2 and InterfaceL3 and transform them into Generics
  • Add Physical Interfaces, Sub Interfaces, Lag Interfaces and Virtual Interface

@BeArchiTek BeArchiTek self-assigned this Nov 11, 2024
@BeArchiTek BeArchiTek requested a review from a team November 11, 2024 19:13
@BeArchiTek BeArchiTek added the type: enhancement New feature or request label Nov 11, 2024
default_value: true
default_value: 1514
order_weight: 1300
- name: status
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

As we can't edit dropdown on generic I don't know if we shouldn't put it in the actual node ... (even tho it's going to be duplicated ...)

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

you can override in a node the dropdown by recreating the attribute with the keyword "inherited: true" to redefine the options.

I would let it in the generic, and people can override it afterwards if they need other options.

inherit_from:
- DcimInterface
- InterfaceLayer2
- InterfaceLayer3
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

But here your virtual interface could have both l2 and l3 configurations ... wondering if we shouldn't create multiple nodes for that

e.g.
virtual l2 interface
virtual l3 interface

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

it's a tradeoff, if you get 2 types (L2 and L3) for virtual, you may want to do it for other interfaces too, but if you then want to keep some relationships no too "wide", you will need to create other Generics, just for the sake of "grouping" some models together.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
type: enhancement New feature or request
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants