Virtual Chassis device/interfaces are not grouped

[darcynz]

When modelling connections to a virtual chassis interfaces appear as separate devices on the map.

Not sure how difficult this would be but, perhaps the switch members of a chassis should be connected by by default as they represent 1 logical device.

[jpobeda]

I'm seeing something similar with server chassis where you don't normally document the internal mapping of the virtual nics and I end up having all these blades floating around unconnected.

How do you guys get around this? I guess children can be "virtually" connected with a dummy edge?

[darcynz]

I've now modeled our Virtual Chassis with an abstracted SwitchPort loop connection between each and it works okay, except where we have more than 4 members in a stack.

It would be nice to be able to hide this to show the logical group, but I imagine that's not going to be straight forward.

[vrelk]

Yep. I have floating islands of switches because of this. It also makes a mess because if you have redundant links on 2 switches in a stack, it shows up as two different switches instead of combining it into one.

[noziwatele]

+1 for virtual chassis grouping. We use a lot of VSS/SVL and switch stacks and having individual devices displayed is not very useful or usable.

[dreng]

As there are reasons for grouping as well as against grouping, this should be an individual parameter.