Skip to content

Cable Length Adding Parallel Paths Together #15739

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

Closed
jf5264835 opened this issue Apr 16, 2024 · 3 comments · Fixed by #19356
Closed

Cable Length Adding Parallel Paths Together #15739

jf5264835 opened this issue Apr 16, 2024 · 3 comments · Fixed by #19356
Assignees
Labels
netbox severity: low Does not significantly disrupt application functionality, or a workaround is available status: accepted This issue has been accepted for implementation topic: cabling type: bug A confirmed report of unexpected behavior in the application
Milestone

Comments

@jf5264835
Copy link

Deployment Type

Self-hosted

NetBox Version

v3.7.5

Python Version

3.10

Steps to Reproduce

  1. Create device with interfaces.
  2. Create a patch panel with front and rear ports.
  3. Create second device with interfaces and second device with front and rear ports at different site.
  4. Patch interface to 2 front ports of patch panel (Simulating the two individual strands of a duplex fiber cable)
  5. Patch two rear ports from the first patch panel device to two rear ports of the second patch panel device.
  6. Patch two front ports from second patch panel device to one interface of second device with interfaces.

Expected Behavior

Distance reported in total distance field should be 57426m, the length of 2m patch cable, a 3m patch cable, and 57,421m of dark fiber.

Observed Behavior

Total cable is being calculated as the sum of all cables, even when two cables are parallel runs where a duplex cable was broken into two simplex cables. For the purposes of specing optics and other gear the total distance is only 57.421km, not 114.847km. Screenshot below of cable trace.
Snag_1079e34

@jf5264835 jf5264835 added status: needs triage This issue is awaiting triage by a maintainer type: bug A confirmed report of unexpected behavior in the application labels Apr 16, 2024
@jeremystretch jeremystretch removed their assignment Apr 16, 2024
@jeremystretch jeremystretch added status: under review Further discussion is needed to determine this issue's scope and/or implementation and removed status: needs triage This issue is awaiting triage by a maintainer labels Apr 16, 2024
@jeremystretch
Copy link
Member

What if the two parallel cables have different lengths?

@jf5264835
Copy link
Author

In that senario my thought would be that the two paths should then report two separate totals. The only time I can think that a total sum like this would be useful would be if one of the interfaces was unplugged and a loop back cable was installed for shooting the fiber with an OTDR.

@jeremystretch jeremystretch added status: needs owner This issue is tentatively accepted pending a volunteer committed to its implementation severity: low Does not significantly disrupt application functionality, or a workaround is available and removed status: under review Further discussion is needed to determine this issue's scope and/or implementation labels Apr 29, 2024
@jeremystretch jeremystretch self-assigned this Apr 29, 2024
@jeremystretch jeremystretch added status: accepted This issue has been accepted for implementation and removed status: needs owner This issue is tentatively accepted pending a volunteer committed to its implementation labels Apr 29, 2024
@jeremystretch jeremystretch removed their assignment May 13, 2024
@jeremystretch jeremystretch added status: needs owner This issue is tentatively accepted pending a volunteer committed to its implementation and removed status: accepted This issue has been accepted for implementation labels May 13, 2024
@DanSheps DanSheps added status: accepted This issue has been accepted for implementation and removed status: needs owner This issue is tentatively accepted pending a volunteer committed to its implementation labels May 29, 2024
@DanSheps DanSheps self-assigned this May 29, 2024
@jeremystretch jeremystretch added the netbox label Nov 1, 2024 — with Linear
@jeremystretch jeremystretch added status: needs owner This issue is tentatively accepted pending a volunteer committed to its implementation and removed status: accepted This issue has been accepted for implementation labels Dec 26, 2024
Copy link
Contributor

This issue has been automatically marked as stale because it has not had recent activity. It will be closed if no further activity occurs. NetBox is governed by a small group of core maintainers which means not all opened issues may receive direct feedback. Do not attempt to circumvent this process by "bumping" the issue; doing so will result in its immediate closure and you may be barred from participating in any future discussions. Please see our contributing guide.

@github-actions github-actions bot added the pending closure Requires immediate attention to avoid being closed for inactivity label Apr 24, 2025
@jeremystretch jeremystretch self-assigned this Apr 24, 2025
@jeremystretch jeremystretch added status: accepted This issue has been accepted for implementation and removed status: needs owner This issue is tentatively accepted pending a volunteer committed to its implementation pending closure Requires immediate attention to avoid being closed for inactivity labels Apr 24, 2025
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
netbox severity: low Does not significantly disrupt application functionality, or a workaround is available status: accepted This issue has been accepted for implementation topic: cabling type: bug A confirmed report of unexpected behavior in the application
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging a pull request may close this issue.

4 participants