RACK: equipment occupying 1/2 U Vertically

[jprodriguesc1]

Hey guys.
I have some equipment that occupies 1/2 vertically, such as the Cisco ASA5506-X and the Khomp UMG FXS 240.
In my rack I place one next to the other, occupying the same U of the rack.
I can represent this in GLPI. I will leave an image.

In Netbox is it possible for me to leave it the same way?

[mtinberg]

If you look in the mailing list a few days ago Brian Candler answered a very similar question from someone else whether modeling the shelf as a parent Device with two Device Bays and the small units as child Devices or whether to just model the self as a 1U device and the devices on it as associated with the Rack but not in any particular unit (unracked devices). — Mark Tinberg ***@***.***> Division of Information Technology-Network Services University of Wisconsin-Madison

…

________________________________ From: João ***@***.***> Sent: Thursday, April 20, 2023 8:35 AM To: netbox-community/netbox ***@***.***> Cc: Subscribed ***@***.***> Subject: [netbox-community/netbox] RACK: equipment occupying 1/2 U Vertically (Discussion #12306) Hey guys. I have some equipment that occupies 1/2 vertically, such as the Cisco ASA5506-X and the Khomp UMG FXS 240. In my rack I place one next to the other, occupying the same U of the rack. I can represent this in GLPI. I will leave an image. [cisco]<https://user-images.githubusercontent.com/70758953/233382963-123b0cd8-0545-4f6b-a06a-c69d741d0694.png> In Netbox is it possible for me to leave it the same way? — Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub<#12306>, or unsubscribe<https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AAS7UM4NEYFI2SE7K7AD4DLXCE3TRANCNFSM6AAAAAAXFQRXEM>. You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.Message ID: ***@***.***>

[jprodriguesc1]

Also, you mean half of a 1U space horizontally. Netbox now supports 1/2U vertical units.

Hi Brian,

Many thanks for the reply.
Got it, it would be really nice to add this function in a new update.
netbox is an excellent tool!!
Thanks

[candlerb]

Just to confirm, that's two 5U chassis, each one has four blade slots?

In that case, you should create a "parent device" which takes up 5U, and has four "device bays". Then the blades themselves are "child devices" which fit into those bays. Netbox models this quite nicely.

[jprodriguesc1]

Just to confirm, that's two 5U chassis, each one has four blade slots?

In that case, you should create a "parent device" which takes up 5U, and has four "device bays". Then the blades themselves are "child devices" which fit into those bays. Netbox models this quite nicely.

Brian,
Dell's VRTX server comes in two versions: a rack version and a tower version.
And I have both versions in our datacenter.
This image refers to 2 tower servers that are together side by side.
To represent them on the rack I simulated as if they were "lying" horizontally, to solve the problem.

About the child devices had already started to create. And exactly as you mentioned, each device has 4 blades, and these blades have Xenserve installed, virtualizing some services.
As soon as I finish the physical part I will dedicate myself to the virtualization part.

[candlerb]

This image refers to 2 tower servers that are together side by side.

Ah right - so the image is what's in Netbox, rather than reality. I get it now. It's a bit hard to find a photo being end-of-life, but here is it.

I think your solution is as good as you can get with Netbox today. I don't think it's possible for a single device to be both "parent" and "child" (so you can't have shelf -> tower -> blade). The only other option I can think of is a 10U device which represents "a pair of VRTX towers sitting on a shelf"

Essentially, your Netbox shows what you would have preferred to have, which is two 5U rackmount servers :-)

[deeconwastaken]

@jprodriguesc1 Can you please provide an device type export for the Dell VRTX ? Or maybe even upload them to the Device Type Library? Thank you.