3.1 "Physical Links" example and feature requests

[normalcy]

Hi I just wondered if anyone is using the "physical links" feature introduced in 3.1? Anyone got an example of how they're using it? I'm guessing its still early days on this feature?

I seem to get a yellow "error getting physical link list (Access Denied)" on every panel on every object that tries to view the physical links tab.  If I try to create a test link on the object physical links tab I also get access denied error.  However if I create a test link from Configuration > physical links, that works and shows up on objects.  I can't see any missing permissions in access control of user/group/object.  Also on the object's tab, the physical links sub-tab is missing an icon.

The other thing I'm trying to understand is how to use it properly. 

If I have devices linked as follows:

PC --> Patchpanel A/1 --> switch 0/1

Is the idea that you need to create 2x physical links for each side of the patch panel?

eg:

1. Link A: PC LAN interface -> Rack 1: Patch A/1 BACK
2. Link B: Rack 1: Patch A/1 FRONT -> Switchport 0/1 interface

Feature requests:

1. Will this feature integrate with the "find switchport" to include the physical links?
2. Could there eventually be a "layer-1" topology map as there is with layer-2 and layer-3 maps?  It would be great to potentially see all the cable joins in a relationship from switch to end device. I guess that would need a 'physical link' from a wall-plate to device as well as the rack side.

[normalcy]

Just wanted to bump on this topic to check if anyone has used the physical links feature and what for?

[Staj]

I'm curious too.

[zev]

Latest fixes for physical links (as well as "Access denied" problem) were done in 3.3 and icon was added in 3.4.

I've added screenshot that is configured as in your example.
Currently physical links are done for documenting purposes only. They are not used in maps nor in search.

---

[Staj]

Thanks, any ideas on what they might be used for in the future or if Layer 2 Topology discovery might influence this feature?

[zev]

We haven't thought about it yet.
You can also order custom development form Raden Soultions if you want it to be implemented quickly.

[Staj]

At the moment, we're doing another pass on expanding our use of NetXMS given it's new features since the last time we did so (which was a while ago). What I am interested in is sharing some of the stuff we're doing, will continue that on another thread though.