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

Add URM as Fiber Optic Port Type #1002

Merged
merged 3 commits into from
Dec 8, 2021

Conversation

sklemer1
Copy link
Contributor

@sklemer1 sklemer1 commented Oct 15, 2021

Add 'URM' as Port Type for fiber ports.

URM is a German standard according to DIN SPEC 40032:2013-10 and compareable to MPO in sense of density.

Compare:
https://www.beuth.de/de/technische-regel/din-spec-40032/190360639
https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/LWL-Steckverbinder#URM

Taken from netbox-community/netbox#7052

@glennmatthews
Copy link
Contributor

Is it desirable to distinguish between URM-P2, URM-P4, URM-P8 port types? Compare to netbox-community/netbox#7052

URM is a German standard according to DIN SPEC 40032:2013-10 and compareable to MPO in sense of density.

Compare:
https://www.beuth.de/de/technische-regel/din-spec-40032/190360639
https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/LWL-Steckverbinder#URM

Taken from netbox-community/netbox#7052
@sklemer1
Copy link
Contributor Author

We thought about P2 to P8. The neat thing with URM is that you can plug 4 P2 plugs in a P8 socket. But as this can't be modelled in a sensible way in nautobot/netbox we came to the conclusion to model everything only with P2 types and do the outlet naming to reflect that it is a P8 one. Netbox did the same thing with MPO where there are also different kinds of outlets.

That said: I would vote for staying compatible with netbox so I'll change the PR to reflect the netbox change.

@andrexp
Copy link

andrexp commented Oct 17, 2021

Afaik there are only 2 types of URM. URM-P2 and P8 for patch-cables and URM-K8 and K2 for patchpanels. The best way should be implementing URM-2 and URM-8 so it can be used as patchpanel and patch-cable type.

@glennmatthews glennmatthews added the question Further information is requested label Oct 22, 2021
Copy link
Contributor

@glennmatthews glennmatthews left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

We're willing to merge this as it currently stands once it's updated to pass linting.

nautobot/dcim/choices.py Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
nautobot/dcim/choices.py Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
@sklemer1
Copy link
Contributor Author

Awesome; thanks.

@jedelman8 jedelman8 added status: accepted and removed question Further information is requested labels Nov 30, 2021
@glennmatthews glennmatthews merged commit 6c5dafd into nautobot:develop Dec 8, 2021
glennmatthews added a commit that referenced this pull request Dec 8, 2021
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants