Power feeds should support one-to-many connections for residential/home use cases #680

New Issue

MrUnknownDE · 2026-04-05T17:08:34+02:00

MrUnknownDE commented

2026-04-05 17:08:34 +02:00

Originally created by @sebmuc99 on 12/27/2025

NetBox version

v4.2.0 (and earlier)

Feature type

Change to existing functionality

Proposed functionality

Allow power feeds to connect to multiple device power ports instead of the current one-to-one limitation. This would enable accurate modeling of residential, small office, and industrial electrical installations where one circuit breaker powers multiple wall outlets or devices.

Use case

The Real-World Scenario

In residential electrical systems, a single circuit breaker (power feed) typically powers multiple wall outlets, and each wall outlet can power multiple devices (either directly or via power strips). For example:

Circuit Breaker: F12-Kitchen-Outlets (16A)

Powers: KI-OL-01 (Wall Outlet Kitchen 01)
Powers: KI-OL-02 (Wall Outlet Kitchen 02)
Powers: KI-OL-03 (Wall Outlet Kitchen 03)
Powers: KI-OL-04 (Wall Outlet Kitchen 04)

Each wall outlet then powers one or more devices:

KI-OL-01 → Refrigerator
KI-OL-02 → Power Strip → Coffee Maker + Toaster
KI-OL-03 → Dishwasher
KI-OL-04 → Microwave

The Problem

NetBox currently allows a power feed to connect to only ONE device's power port. This means I can only connect F12-Kitchen-Outlets to KI-OL-01, and the feed becomes unavailable for KI-OL-02, KI-OL-03, and KI-OL-04. This doesn't reflect reality - the circuit breaker physically supplies power to all four outlets simultaneously.

Current Workaround (Doesn't Work)

The only workaround would be to create separate power feeds for each outlet:

F12-Kitchen-Outlets-Port1
F12-Kitchen-Outlets-Port2
F12-Kitchen-Outlets-Port3
F12-Kitchen-Outlets-Port4

But this is incorrect modeling because:

There's only ONE physical circuit breaker, not four
All four outlets share the same 16A capacity (not 16A each)
Power utilization tracking would be wrong - the circuit could be overloaded even if each "feed" shows under 80%

Proposed Solution

Power feeds should support one-to-many connections to device power ports, similar to how a network switch port can connect to multiple downstream devices through different cables.

This would allow accurate modeling of:

Residential installations: One circuit breaker → multiple wall outlets → devices
Small office/home office (SOHO): One circuit breaker → multiple workstations
Industrial panels: One circuit breaker → multiple machines in a work area
Extended datacenter scenarios: Main circuit breaker → distribution panel → multiple rack PDUs

Benefits

Accurate topology: Reflects real electrical distribution in homes, offices, and industrial settings
Proper power tracking: Total load on circuit breaker = sum of all connected devices across all outlets
Better capacity planning: Shows when a circuit is approaching its amperage limit across all connected outlets
Realistic modeling: Matches how electricians actually wire buildings
Compliance tracking: Helps ensure circuits don't exceed rated capacity

Example Hierarchy

Power Panel (Apartment Distribution Panel)
  └─ Power Feed: F12-Kitchen-Outlets (16A Circuit Breaker)
      ├─ KI-OL-01 Power Port → KI-OL-01 Outlet → Refrigerator (300W)
      ├─ KI-OL-02 Power Port → KI-OL-02 Outlet → Power Strip → Coffee Maker (1000W) + Toaster (800W)
      ├─ KI-OL-03 Power Port → KI-OL-03 Outlet → Dishwasher (1800W)
      └─ KI-OL-04 Power Port → KI-OL-04 Outlet → Microwave (1200W)
      
Total load on F12-Kitchen-Outlets: 5100W (22A @ 230V) → Circuit overload warning!

Database changes

Modification to the power feed cable termination logic to support multiple connections. The CableTermination model or power feed relationship would need to support one-to-many instead of one-to-one.

External dependencies

None

Related Discussion: This issue relates to the unanswered question by @CvR42 in Discussion #12912:

"Power feeds as something that has a circuit breaker makes absolute sense to me, but then why is there the restriction to allow only one connection to a power feed? Real-world wiring normally doesn't have that restriction."

The current datacenter model (one feed → one PDU → multiple outlets) works for that specific use case, but residential and small office installations are structured differently and are equally valid to model in NetBox.

*Originally created by @sebmuc99 on 12/27/2025* ### NetBox version v4.2.0 (and earlier) ### Feature type Change to existing functionality ### Proposed functionality Allow power feeds to connect to **multiple device power ports** instead of the current one-to-one limitation. This would enable accurate modeling of residential, small office, and industrial electrical installations where one circuit breaker powers multiple wall outlets or devices. ### Use case #### The Real-World Scenario In residential electrical systems, a single circuit breaker (power feed) typically powers **multiple wall outlets**, and each wall outlet can power **multiple devices** (either directly or via power strips). For example: **Circuit Breaker: F12-Kitchen-Outlets (16A)** - Powers: KI-OL-01 (Wall Outlet Kitchen 01) - Powers: KI-OL-02 (Wall Outlet Kitchen 02) - Powers: KI-OL-03 (Wall Outlet Kitchen 03) - Powers: KI-OL-04 (Wall Outlet Kitchen 04) Each wall outlet then powers one or more devices: - KI-OL-01 → Refrigerator - KI-OL-02 → Power Strip → Coffee Maker + Toaster - KI-OL-03 → Dishwasher - KI-OL-04 → Microwave #### The Problem NetBox currently allows a power feed to connect to only ONE device's power port. This means I can only connect F12-Kitchen-Outlets to KI-OL-01, and the feed becomes unavailable for KI-OL-02, KI-OL-03, and KI-OL-04. This doesn't reflect reality - the circuit breaker physically supplies power to all four outlets simultaneously. #### Current Workaround (Doesn't Work) The only workaround would be to create separate power feeds for each outlet: - F12-Kitchen-Outlets-Port1 - F12-Kitchen-Outlets-Port2 - F12-Kitchen-Outlets-Port3 - F12-Kitchen-Outlets-Port4 But this is incorrect modeling because: 1. There's only ONE physical circuit breaker, not four 2. All four outlets share the same 16A capacity (not 16A each) 3. Power utilization tracking would be wrong - the circuit could be overloaded even if each "feed" shows under 80% #### Proposed Solution Power feeds should support **one-to-many connections** to device power ports, similar to how a network switch port can connect to multiple downstream devices through different cables. This would allow accurate modeling of: - **Residential installations**: One circuit breaker → multiple wall outlets → devices - **Small office/home office (SOHO)**: One circuit breaker → multiple workstations - **Industrial panels**: One circuit breaker → multiple machines in a work area - **Extended datacenter scenarios**: Main circuit breaker → distribution panel → multiple rack PDUs #### Benefits 1. **Accurate topology**: Reflects real electrical distribution in homes, offices, and industrial settings 2. **Proper power tracking**: Total load on circuit breaker = sum of all connected devices across all outlets 3. **Better capacity planning**: Shows when a circuit is approaching its amperage limit across all connected outlets 4. **Realistic modeling**: Matches how electricians actually wire buildings 5. **Compliance tracking**: Helps ensure circuits don't exceed rated capacity #### Example Hierarchy ``` Power Panel (Apartment Distribution Panel) └─ Power Feed: F12-Kitchen-Outlets (16A Circuit Breaker) ├─ KI-OL-01 Power Port → KI-OL-01 Outlet → Refrigerator (300W) ├─ KI-OL-02 Power Port → KI-OL-02 Outlet → Power Strip → Coffee Maker (1000W) + Toaster (800W) ├─ KI-OL-03 Power Port → KI-OL-03 Outlet → Dishwasher (1800W) └─ KI-OL-04 Power Port → KI-OL-04 Outlet → Microwave (1200W) Total load on F12-Kitchen-Outlets: 5100W (22A @ 230V) → Circuit overload warning! ``` ### Database changes Modification to the power feed cable termination logic to support multiple connections. The `CableTermination` model or power feed relationship would need to support one-to-many instead of one-to-one. ### External dependencies None --- **Related Discussion**: This issue relates to the unanswered question by @CvR42 in [Discussion #12912](https://github.com/netbox-community/netbox/discussions/12912#discussioncomment-5163491): > "Power feeds as something that has a circuit breaker makes absolute sense to me, but then why is there the restriction to allow only one connection to a power feed? Real-world wiring normally doesn't have that restriction." The current datacenter model (one feed → one PDU → multiple outlets) works for that specific use case, but residential and small office installations are structured differently and are equally valid to model in NetBox.

MrUnknownDE closed this issue

2026-04-05 17:08:34 +02:00

Sign in to join this conversation.

Branches Tags

main

21455-sql-indexes-audit

21357-register-model-actions

feature

20924-plugin-ui-components

21766-improve-test-coverage-for-sortable-table-columns

21157-export-template-public-models

21025-pre-render-config-contexts

21364-swagger

feature-ip-prefix-link

20911-dropdown-3

fix_module_substitution

21160-filterset

20911-dropdown-2

20044-elevation-stuck-lightmode

7604-filter-modifiers-v3

20660-script-load

19724-graphql

14884-script

19720-macaddress-interface-generic-relation

fix-19669-api-image-download

7604-filter-modifiers

19275-fixes-interface-bulk-edit

fix-17794-get_field_value_return_list

11507-show-aggregate-and-rir-on-api

9583-add_column_specific_search_field_to_tables

No Label netbox netbox netbox netbox netbox netbox netbox netbox netbox netbox netbox netbox netbox netbox netbox netbox netbox netbox netbox netbox netbox netbox netbox netbox netbox netbox netbox netbox netbox netbox netbox netbox netbox netbox netbox netbox netbox netbox netbox netbox netbox netbox netbox netbox netbox netbox netbox netbox netbox netbox netbox netbox netbox netbox netbox netbox netbox netbox netbox netbox netbox netbox netbox netbox netbox netbox netbox netbox netbox netbox netbox netbox netbox netbox netbox netbox netbox netbox netbox netbox netbox netbox netbox netbox netbox netbox netbox netbox netbox netbox netbox netbox netbox netbox netbox netbox netbox netbox netbox netbox netbox netbox netbox netbox netbox netbox netbox netbox netbox netbox netbox netbox netbox netbox netbox netbox netbox netbox netbox netbox netbox netbox netbox netbox netbox netbox netbox netbox netbox netbox netbox netbox netbox netbox netbox netbox netbox netbox netbox netbox netbox netbox netbox netbox netbox netbox netbox netbox netbox netbox netbox netbox netbox netbox netbox netbox netbox netbox netbox netbox netbox netbox netbox netbox netbox netbox netbox netbox netbox netbox netbox netbox netbox netbox netbox netbox netbox netbox netbox netbox netbox netbox netbox netbox netbox netbox netbox netbox netbox netbox netbox netbox netbox netbox netbox netbox netbox netbox netbox netbox netbox netbox netbox netbox netbox netbox netbox netbox netbox netbox netbox netbox netbox netbox netbox netbox netbox netbox netbox netbox netbox netbox netbox netbox netbox netbox netbox netbox netbox netbox netbox netbox netbox netbox netbox netbox netbox netbox netbox netbox netbox netbox netbox netbox netbox netbox netbox netbox netbox netbox netbox netbox netbox netbox netbox netbox netbox netbox netbox netbox netbox netbox netbox netbox netbox netbox netbox netbox netbox netbox netbox netbox netbox netbox netbox netbox netbox netbox netbox netbox netbox netbox netbox netbox netbox netbox netbox netbox netbox netbox netbox netbox netbox netbox netbox netbox netbox netbox netbox netbox netbox netbox netbox netbox netbox netbox netbox netbox netbox netbox netbox netbox netbox netbox netbox netbox netbox netbox netbox netbox netbox netbox netbox netbox netbox netbox netbox netbox netbox netbox netbox netbox netbox netbox netbox netbox netbox netbox netbox netbox netbox netbox netbox netbox netbox netbox netbox netbox netbox netbox type: feature type: feature type: feature type: feature type: feature type: feature type: feature type: feature type: feature type: feature type: feature type: feature type: feature type: feature type: feature type: feature type: feature type: feature type: feature type: feature type: feature type: feature type: feature type: feature type: feature type: feature type: feature type: feature type: feature type: feature type: feature type: feature type: feature type: feature type: feature type: feature type: feature type: feature type: feature type: feature type: feature type: feature type: feature type: feature type: feature type: feature type: feature type: feature type: feature type: feature type: feature type: feature type: feature type: feature type: feature type: feature type: feature type: feature type: feature type: feature type: feature type: feature type: feature type: feature type: feature type: feature type: feature type: feature type: feature type: feature type: feature type: feature type: feature type: feature type: feature type: feature type: feature type: feature type: feature type: feature type: feature type: feature type: feature type: feature type: feature type: feature type: feature type: feature type: feature type: feature type: feature type: feature type: feature type: feature type: feature type: feature type: feature type: feature type: feature type: feature type: feature type: feature type: feature type: feature type: feature type: feature type: feature type: feature type: feature type: feature type: feature type: feature type: feature type: feature type: feature type: feature type: feature type: feature type: feature type: feature type: feature type: feature type: feature type: feature type: feature type: feature type: feature type: feature type: feature type: feature type: feature type: feature type: feature type: feature type: feature type: feature type: feature type: feature type: feature type: feature

1 Participants

Notifications

Due Date

No due date set.

Dependencies

No dependencies set.

Reference: github/netbox#680