Skip to content

Conversation

@hetnex
Copy link

@hetnex hetnex commented Nov 3, 2025

I added this device type to my netbox, so I made this commit adds the Cisco Meraki MS390-24UX switch to the device-type library.

  • 24 × multigigabit (mGbE) UPoE/802.3bt access ports
  • 4 × 10 G SFP+ uplink ports
  • 2 × 40 G QSFP dedicated stacking ports
  • 1 × dedicated management port
  • Dual IEC C14 power inputs (Slot 0, Slot 1)
  • 1 RU height, full depth, 8.25 kg
  • Idle/maximum power draw: 162.7 W / 809.9 W

Reference: Meraki MS390-24UX Datasheet

I added this device type to my netbox, so I made this commit adds the Cisco Meraki MS390-24UX switch to the device-type library.

- 24 × multigigabit (mGbE) UPoE/802.3bt access ports
- 4 × 10 G SFP+ uplink ports
- 2 × 40 G QSFP dedicated stacking ports
- 1 × dedicated management port
- Dual IEC C14 power inputs (Slot 0, Slot 1)
- 1 RU height, full depth, 8.25 kg
- Idle/maximum power draw: 162.7 W / 809.9 W

Reference: [Meraki MS390-24UX Datasheet](https://documentation.meraki.com/MS/Product_Information/Overviews_and_Datasheets/MS390_Datasheet)
Fixed non-ASCII characters (×) in the YAML definition.

- Replaced all "×" multiplication symbols with "x" in comments to ensure ASCII-only compliance.
Fix: update slug to satisfy validation rule.

- Changed slug to end with the normalized model:
  * cisco-ms390-24ux  -> cisco-meraki-ms390-24ux
@hetnex hetnex marked this pull request as ready for review November 3, 2025 16:08
comments: >
[Meraki MS390-24UX Datasheet](https://documentation.meraki.com/MS/Product_Information/Overviews_and_Datasheets/MS390_Datasheet)

power-ports:
Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

The spec sheet suggests that these are hot swappable PSUs, therefore they should be modeled as module-bays

@harryajc harryajc added the status: revisions needed This issue requires additional information to be actionable label Nov 4, 2025
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

status: revisions needed This issue requires additional information to be actionable

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants