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

Feature Request: Possible to use napalm #8

Open
davama opened this issue Feb 4, 2022 · 3 comments
Open

Feature Request: Possible to use napalm #8

davama opened this issue Feb 4, 2022 · 3 comments
Labels
enhancement New feature or request

Comments

@davama
Copy link

davama commented Feb 4, 2022

Hello,

Wondering if it is possible to instead of pull device interfaces from the device type, but from napalm in order to sync.

Hope this makes sense.

Thank you,
Dave

@drygdryg drygdryg added the enhancement New feature or request label Feb 4, 2022
@ryanmerolle
Copy link

That's an interesting feature request that if implemented, but it sort of overlaps with ntc-netbox-plugin-onboarding.

I personally like this implementation because it allows me to keep my device in sync with the device-type model I defined. I rather not import sub interfaces, vlan interfaces, and loopbacks specific to a device since that may not be common for the device type/model.

That's not to say you could not do an implementation like what you are describing, that could only sync interfaces of a specific type (of your choosing), etc. I would just recommend an option to allow users to enable or disable the napalm function.

@davama
Copy link
Author

davama commented Mar 8, 2022

Thank you for the reply @ryanmerolle

That's not to say you could not do an implementation like what you are describing, that could only sync interfaces of a specific type (of your choosing), etc. I would just recommend an option to allow users to enable or disable the napalm function.

That's exactly what I would prefer.

Just a comparison/sync with physical interfaces.

@ryanmerolle
Copy link

I'm not the maintainer, but just a lurker.

The feature would likely require quite a bit of work compared to the current functionality in place.

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

No branches or pull requests

3 participants