Unable to trace the front-rear port connection after importing connections from CSV

[1a11]

NetBox Edition

NetBox Community

NetBox Version

v4.4.0

Python Version

3.10

Steps to Reproduce

1. Create two devices with module bays
2. Create two modules with front and rear ports
3. Assign each module to it's respectful device
4. Import Cables:

side_a_device,side_a_type,side_a_name,side_b_device,side_b_type,side_b_name,side_a_site,side_b_site,label,color,type
01.01.TH.10,dcim.frontport,Serial Port Out,01.01.TH.9,dcim.rearport,Serial Port In,02,02,RS485,Light Green,cat6

5. Unable to trace the conenction from port to port from both sides A and B

Expected Behavior

The connection should be traceable after the import is completed.

Observed Behavior

The connection is not traceable, instead reporting "No paths found":

[bctiemann]

@1a11 Could you please add some detail to your steps 1-3, showing the names and details used for your setup? That would make this issue much easier to reproduce and fix. The less friction there is for a contributor to repro the problem, the better the chance of a fix being developed. Thank you!

[1a11]

Cables exist between the following device types :

1. Device with rear and front ports created in it specifically:

2. Device with rear and front ports created inside it's module:

In production:

• A device of type 2 exists. There is a mulude inside of it, with front and rear ports:

• Module:

• • And it's two ports:

[1a11]

Module yaml exported:

profile: null
manufacturer: Haier
model: YCJ-A002
part_number: ''
description: "\u041F\u043B\u0430\u0442\u0430 \u0443\u043F\u0440\u0430\u0432\u043B\u0435\
  \u043D\u0438\u044F \u043A\u043E\u043D\u0434\u0438\u0446\u0438\u043E\u043D\u0435\u0440\
  \u043E\u043C"
weight: null
weight_unit: null
comments: ''
front-ports:
- name: Serial Port Out
  type: other
  color: ''
  rear_port: Serial Port In
  rear_port_position: 1
  label: RS485
  description: ''
rear-ports:
- name: Serial Port In
  type: other
  color: ''
  positions: 1
  label: RS485
  description: ''

[1a11]

Is there maybe an update to the behavior?

[jnovinger]

@1a11, your extra notes don't seem to be helping me understand this. Can you please update the original steps to reproduce (as in, actually edit the original report). Note the instructions from the bug template:

Describe in detail the exact steps that someone else can take to reproduce this bug using the current stable release of NetBox. Begin with the creation of any necessary database objects and call out every operation being performed explicitly. If reporting a bug in the REST API, be sure to reconstruct the raw HTTP request(s) being made: Don't rely on a client library such as pynetbox. Additionally, do not rely on the demo instance for reproducing suspected bugs, as its data is prone to modification or deletion at any time.

In particular, that first sentence is saying you must provide enough detail, with enough precision, in the right order for a maintainer to be able to reproduce this issue. You must account for every piece of data that this bug depends on. This is the bare minimum. Without that level of detail, we are not able to make progress on this (or any other) reported bug.

I've spent 10 minutes reading your subsequent comment and I'm left with more questions than when I read the initial report. To be very clear, screenshots are absolutely not an acceptable substitute for the level of detail I'm asking for.

[github-actions[bot]]

This is a reminder that additional information is needed in order to further triage this issue. If the requested details are not provided, the issue will soon be closed automatically.

[1a11]

Keeping this open. I will see what other information I can gather on the topic. Issue in current state does describe the steps taken to reproduce the issue on our side. If you could possibly direct me to the specific log file I could export or database dump I should do to give you as much info as possible?

[arthanson]

@1a11 You have steps but not details in the steps in your original bug report. I.E. You state:

1. Create two devices with module bays
2. Create two modules with front and rear ports
3. Assign each module to it's respectful device

Provide details here like:

1. Create a device "xxx" (include any required fields in this that may effect bug report)
2. Create a device "yyy"
3. Create a module bay "mb1" on site "xxx", Create a module bay "mb2" on site "yyy"

In step 4 you give a csv that references a bunch of devices, the steps to create these devices and configuration should be given in the above steps and the names should match so we can make sure we are reproducing exactly the steps you are taking. Right now we have to guess and make a lot of assumptions when trying to reproduce this. If an item is referenced in the csv - there should be clear steps to create it in the reproduction steps, so if the csv references "01.01.TH.10" then the steps above should show creating something with "01.01.TH.10".

[github-actions[bot]]

This is a reminder that additional information is needed in order to further triage this issue. If the requested details are not provided, the issue will soon be closed automatically.

[github-actions[bot]]

This issue is being closed as no further information has been provided. If you would like to revisit this topic, please first modify your original post to include all the requested detail, and then ask that the issue be reopened.