XCP-ng
    • Categories
    • Recent
    • Tags
    • Popular
    • Users
    • Groups
    • Register
    • Login

    Netbox Plugin: IP-address created always uses the "largest prefix" in Netbox

    Scheduled Pinned Locked Moved Xen Orchestra
    5 Posts 4 Posters 539 Views 3 Watching
    Loading More Posts
    • Oldest to Newest
    • Newest to Oldest
    • Most Votes
    Reply
    • Reply as topic
    Log in to reply
    This topic has been deleted. Only users with topic management privileges can see it.
    • vilhelmV Offline
      vilhelm
      last edited by

      Let's say I have the prefix 192.168.0.0/16 added in Netbox, and a sub-prefix 192.168.100.0/24. Now, if I have a VM running using IP 192.168.100.69, the Netbox plugin will create this IP as 192.168.100.69/16 instead of 192.168.100.69/24.

      Is this intended behavior and if not, should I open an issue about it on GitHub? Thanks!

      pdoniasP 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
      • olivierlambertO Online
        olivierlambert Vates 🪐 Co-Founder CEO
        last edited by

        Question for @fohdeesha and/or @pdonias

        fohdeeshaF 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
        • fohdeeshaF Offline
          fohdeesha Vates 🪐 Pro Support Team @olivierlambert
          last edited by

          @olivierlambert I vaguely remember @pdonias and I discussing which of these behaviors would be best and we decided on adding it to the smallest matching prefix, I'm not sure why the behavior is the opposite

          1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 1
          • pdoniasP Offline
            pdonias Vates 🪐 XO Team @vilhelm
            last edited by

            @vilhelm This isn't the intended behavior, it should indeed pick the /24 prefix. I tested it with your values and it properly chooses the /24 prefix. Is the Netbox plugin up-to-date and re-built? It should work since commit 0966efb7f29758a3a179237e97e641f6288b6040 (XO 5.63.1, xo-server-netbox 0.3.1).

            vilhelmV 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 1
            • vilhelmV Offline
              vilhelm @pdonias
              last edited by

              @pdonias Yes, I was running a newer version than that but just to make sure I upgraded to 8068b83ffe58e6caed0cac5816ac2690479a9c41. Still the same problem, unfortunately.

              I'm not too sure if it matters, but there are VMs running in the pool that does not have an IP in a "smaller" /24 prefix. So if the prefixes 192.168.0.0/16 and 192.168.100.0/24 are in Netbox, there might be VMs using IPs other than the ones in the 192.168.100.0/24 prefix.

              1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
              • First post
                Last post