Call for testing: netbox-sync 1.10 (development image)

[semx]

1.9.1 went out on 9 October with the fixes from the last round of reports. The next release is a feature release, and most of what is in it was asked for in issues by people who run netbox-sync against real vCenters. I don't have one anymore, and neither does Ricardo, so before 1.10.0 is tagged I'd like the people who asked for these features to try them on their setups.

How to test

Pull the development image and run it with -n (dry run) first:

docker pull ghcr.io/bb-ricardo/netbox-sync:development
docker run --rm -v $(pwd)/settings.ini:/app/settings.ini ghcr.io/bb-ricardo/netbox-sync:development -n

The development image is rebuilt by the workflow on every push to development that touches the code, so it carries these changes as soon as the PRs are merged. All new options are off by default: without them in your settings.ini the sync behaves exactly like 1.9.1, so pulling the image alone changes nothing.

What is new

issue	option(s)	what it does
#531, #463, #454	vm_tenant_resource_pool_relation, vm_tenant_folder_relation, vm_tenant_inherit_from_cluster, overwrite_vm_tenant	a VM's tenant from its resource pool, its vCenter folder, or its cluster; order is vm_tenant_relation, pool, folder, cluster, first match wins; IPs inherit the VM tenant; overwrite_vm_tenant = False keeps a tenant set by hand
#494	vm_exclude_by_resource_pool_filter, vm_include_by_resource_pool_filter	skip or keep VMs by the resource pool they are in (pool path Parent/Child or plain name)
#465	vm_name_regex	derive the NetBox VM name (named group name) and optionally the description (description) from the vCenter name; a VM that gets a new name is matched by MAC/IP/serial and renamed in place
#343	sync_host_fc_adapters	Fibre Channel HBAs of ESXi hosts as NetBox interfaces: name, FC type from the adapter model, WWN, model and driver, enabled from the port status

PRs: #589 (tenants and resource pool filters), #590 (vm_name_regex), #591 (sync_host_fc_adapters)

Each option is described in settings-example.ini on the development branch, and the issue linked above has the design and the test cases.

What I'd like to hear

In the issue for the feature you tried, or here:

• your vCenter and NetBox versions, and roughly how many VMs/hosts
• the options you set and whether the result in NetBox is what you expected, on the first run and on the second one (the second run should change nothing)
• anything that surprised you: an option name that reads wrong, a default you'd flip, a case the design misses
• WARNING/ERROR lines from the log, if any

Good or bad, both are useful. If nothing comes back in about three weeks, 1.10.0 ships as is.

@tikondrus (#531), @Hidden-Network404 and @xonacs (#463), @mertoktem29 (#454), @KIvanov-1984 (#494), @marvinwankersteen (#465), @sulik76 and @clementTal (#343). Everyone else running netbox-sync against a vCenter is of course welcome too; recent contributors @tfoks, @lukify85, @marcinpsk, @eric-eisenhart, if you have a minute. CC @bb-Ricardo.

[tfoks]

Find my comment in issue #343

Regards