@poddingue Thanks for the reply.
I have been checking the source code of the Netbox plugin over the weekend and added the necessary code to enable the virtual disk sync. In Netbox itself, you do need to add the correct permission for it to work.

Will do some more testing during the week, and create a pull-request once I'm satisfied with the result. Up to the Vates if they want to merge it into the main branch.

Thank you for your reply!

Hey all

In my homelab I'm running a XCP-NG cluster and a Netbox instance. I have enabled the Netbox plugin and it syncs correctly.

However, I have noticed that while the "Interfaces" tab syncs all the interfaces attached to the VM, it is not the case for the virtual drives attached to the VM. As an example, I have a VM that has 2 disks attached to it of 25gb and one of 100gb. Netbox does show total "Disk Space" as 125gb under the main tab "Virtual Machine" ==> "Resources", but the separate tab "Virtual Disks" is not populated at all.

I was able to find another form post from 2 years ago, but unfortunately, no answer was provided.
Link to post: forum link

Is this something that needs to be added to the logic of the plugin?
I have tried to add extra permission under the xoa read-write permission group in Netbox for "Virtual Disks", but this did not solve the issue.

Anyone that can help me out?
Thanks a lot!

@bleader just checked the Excel assessment file I got from the security team. They used Crowdstrike (sensor is not installed on xcp-ng hosts).

The funny thing is, the asset that it reports as vulnerable is the VM that is running XOA (official image provided by XCP-NG). It is deployed recently, so everything is up-to-date, but even then I don't understand how it reports the XOA VM as the one containing the vulnerabilities.

@bleader Thank for the response. The command you provided indeed does report back the latest version:

Version     : 4.17.5
Release     : 15.3.xcpng8.3

Not sure why the security teams still reports it as not patched.

Hey all,

I couldn't find any information regarding this, so here I go again and posting on the forms.

Are the patches for xcp-ng available to upgrade Xen to version 4.17.5-15.3 ?

Currently when I run the

xl info | grep xen_version

I get

xen_version: 4.17.5-15

I would like to upgrade to patch some of the vulnerabilities found recently:
september-2025-security-update

XOA is not showing any available patches. Running yum update on the hosts also don't show any update.

Cheers

@olivierlambert did not check that unfortunately, since it it is already setup now, will be hard to reproduce it

@olivierlambert no error messages, nothing happening or visible.

Not sure if it is a bug, but when I go to my pool and list all the SR's and want to attach a certain SR to all my hosts (that is partially attached), it does not work.

Does not work here:

However, when I go to the individual SR, and then to the hosts tab, I see a list of all the hosts with a connect button next to it. The connect button here works.

Works here:

I running the latest version of XOA (trial version).

Hey all

I couldn't find a dedicated feature request page for XOA v6, so I will post it here.
I have been using XCP-NG and XOA for a few years now and since I really like the product I decided to play around with XOA v6 (preview).

One think that I noticed is that all the VM are listed under its host, which is obviously fine.
In a larger environment it can get cluttered if you have lots of VMs.

One way to solve this, is by letting users create (sub)folder/groups (in a custom view tab?).
E.g. I can create a static group for all my Windows VMs with different sub groups for domain controllers, lab environment, DNS server...

To take this even further, an option can be added for dynamic groups to dynamically populate the groups based on certain criteria. Since XCP-NG knows what OS is running inside a VM, it can automatically place VMs inside of groups based on the rules the user has put in place for said (sub)group(s).

E.g. I create a new VM called dc01 and it runs Windows as OS. By creating the following rule:
"name" -contains "dc" AND "os name" -contains "Windows"

It automatically "places" the VM in the following sub group
Windows ==> domain controllers

Where exactly the custom view tab would be placed best, I would leave that to the UX designers, but I have included a screenshot for a possible place, right below the search:

The static folder/group approach would be easy to implement I think, about the dynamic approach I'm not sure, but it would be neat for sure!

Edit: in the future the groups can also be used to manage access. E.g. a certain user or groups of users can only access Windows VM group, Linux VM group, Lab VM group....

Thank for reading the post!