Physical Network connections (No API. ETL?)

[thombrooks]

We are doing a proof-of-concept to help our support staff quickly locate end user workstations on a map. We already have the network jack locations mapped (in another third-party tool), and have CDP/LLDP info about which switch port each workstation is connected to. Since we already have an on-prem ITA instance, we figured we'd try using it as the source of truth for the 'missing link' - mapping switch ports to patch panel jacks.

After seeing this post, it appeared that the only way to retrieve or create physical network connections was by using ETL. We created an Export Internal job, applied the swoExportJob v2.0.0 transformation and set everything to 'true' (particularly 'Export network information.')

In the export database, we were able to traverse the network links between devices, patch panels, and switches by studying the configuration_item and configuration_item_relation tables.

However: we cannot seem to find a field containing the descriptions for a patch panel's module ports. This is important because it's how we track station cables (network jack numbers and letters.) To clarify - when we go to the properties of the patch panel, the 'Network' section, and the 'Back Connections' table, these ports do not have connections to other patch panels, but they do have the 'Description' defined with the station cable's jack number and letter. This is what we are trying to access.

Should we be able to see this information via ETL using the standard swoExportJob v2.0.0 transformation, or do we need to add to the default transforms in order to retrieve (and eventually add / update) these description fields?

Re: versions - server.log says DCE firmware version 8.0.0, ITA is 9.4.1.

Thank you!

[gsterling]

Hello.

If you are trying to build your query via an ETL export database, then configuration_item and configuration_item_relation will identify connections beween objects. Port property info is part of the table relation_endpoint_property which should also be found in your ETL export database.

IT Advisor is expected to offer a REST api endpoint later in late 2025 to allow network queries as well as network features become more built out in the IT Advisor web client.

Regards

Greg Sterling

[thombrooks]

Greg,

We are able to see the relationship between the switch port and the patch panel port. What we are not able to see is the contents of the 'End Port Description' field. That's the piece that connects us to our facility map.

Two of these screenshots are from the Network Cable Browser, which does show the info we're looking for.

The other screenshot is the only info we're able to see from the database tables: it's in Mod B, it's a regular RJ 45, it's not on the rear of the rack, and it's port # 21. 

Having done a sql dump of the entire ETL Export Database, searching for '4TRE-1185-A' or even '1185' yields no results.

Is this something we can add or modify to the ETL output transform so it will include these attributes?

Thank you!

 

[gsterling]

You are correct, the description field does not appear to be exported. We will capture a feature request to request this value is added to the export transformation.

Regards

Greg Sterling

[gsterling]

I have created feature request id EIAFR-680 for this item. Please note we cannot estimate a time when and if this request will be delivered. I will note ITA's network REST api's are expected to be improved in 2025 and some of these details will likely be included in that feature.

Regards

Greg Sterling

[thombrooks]

We have created a modified version of the Network Endpoint Properties export transform (attached) and would appreciate it if your team could review. We plan to make the matching change on the input side next, and it would be good to know that we are following 'best practices' before we base that work on something that wasn't up to par. Thank you - TB 

 

 

 

[gsterling]

I have shared your transformation file. I cannot say with certainty whether any form of feedback will come back unless they decided to incorporate the change to ITA moving forward as they cannot promise a change made by a customer won't be impacted by other ITA changes or upgrades unless they are testing it themselves.

I should hear back from them in the next few business days.