PDU outlets cannot be matched to device power supplies

Examples are fictional local conventions. Unless another location is shown, the scope is DC01 / H1. Keep that scope with shortened identifiers.

When to use

Use this guide when the feed is known but an outlet cannot be matched confidently to a particular device inlet. Keep one worksheet row per cord relationship. Device identity and inlet identity belong together; 'server power' is too broad to resolve a specific connection.

What to gather

Gather the rack inventory, approved connection schedule, exact PDU model/outlet diagram, device inlet diagram, and existing cord labels. Use available evidence and the site's authorized identification process; do not unplug cords to establish the map.

NetBox models an outlet as belonging to a device, with its own name and optional physical label. This supports precise records without prescribing a printed format. NetBox source

Identification workflow

These steps are this library's recommended recordkeeping method.

1. Identify the two parent devices. Record the PDU ID and the server or other supplied asset ID. Include location where an identity would otherwise be ambiguous.
2. Copy the endpoint names. Preserve the PDU's outlet designation and the device's inlet wording. Check numbering against the correct model documentation rather than counting visible sockets.
3. Associate the cord. Link its existing cord ID to the two endpoint references using the approved record and field evidence. Mark any obscured endpoint as unconfirmed.
4. Reconcile competing records. Flag duplicate assignments, obsolete device aliases, or a cord ID attached to more than one relationship. Preserve both claims for review.
5. Publish the reviewed relationship. Update the accepted schedule and associated label record together. Keep an evidence link and reviewer owner for subsequent equipment changes.

The expanded procedures and fictional case below are original editorial recordkeeping guidance to adapt to the site's approved process.

Choose the relationship that needs review

Start with the smallest connection you need to describe: one identified cord between one exact PDU outlet and one exact device inlet. If the PDU identity is uncertain, resolve the parent object before assigning an outlet. If the PDU is known but its outlet notation is unclear, compare the installed model and its accepted outlet reference. If the outlet is confirmed but the far-end asset or inlet is obscured, keep that endpoint unconfirmed. These are separate branches, and a complete-looking row should not conceal the difference.

Distinguish a cord problem from a naming problem. Two records that say server power may refer to different inlets on the same device. Two records that use different hostnames may describe the same durable asset. A duplicated cord ID may indicate either competing records for one cord or the same label text applied to two physical cords. Record the competing claims and their evidence before deciding which situation exists. A row should not be deleted merely to make a duplicate warning disappear.

Define the review population by rack, PDU, device, or a named change package. Include the full DC01 / H1 location scope in the register and record any endpoint that falls outside the inspected area. If only one device's two cords are included, say so. That scope is narrower than confirming every outlet on either PDU. Keep the count of included cord relationships alongside the result so later readers can distinguish a device-level check from a complete rack schedule.

Establish the endpoint vocabulary before following the record

The outlet reference needs its parent PDU identity. Where the actual equipment uses bank, branch, module, or other subdivisions in its outlet notation, preserve the relevant components exactly as the approved equipment reference defines them. Do not derive numbering by counting visible sockets. A partial photograph, a rotated mounting arrangement, or an unfamiliar model can make a positional shortcut misleading. Use physical position only as a supplementary observation aid with a stated viewing direction, and keep it separate from the recorded outlet name.

Apply the same discipline at the supplied device. Record the durable asset ID and the inlet or PSU designation together. A hostname can help locate the corresponding inventory record, but it may change independently of the equipment or be reused elsewhere. If an inlet is called PSU1 in the installed documentation, preserve that wording instead of converting it into left without a defined viewpoint. Where equipment has separately managed power modules, identify the actual naming relationship used by its asset and connection records.

Prepare evidence references for both ends and the cord identity that joins them. One view may establish the local outlet while another establishes the asset and inlet. The schedule or accepted identification process must support the fact that these observations belong to the same cord relationship. If the accessible view cannot establish that link, record the gap precisely. An accurately unconfirmed far end is more useful than a guessed complete pair that later work treats as verified.

Reconcile one cord without losing competing information

Enter the observed and documented endpoint values in a way that preserves their origins. If the connection schedule states outlet O07 but the observation appears to show O09, keep both values and cite the model-specific outlet reference used to interpret the marking. Check whether the dispute concerns the socket name, the PDU identity, or the relationship to the cord. These questions may lead to different corrections, and collapsing them into wrong power cable makes the owner repeat the investigation.

Look for duplicate endpoint assignments in the included schedule. An unexplained claim that two cord IDs occupy the same specifically named outlet deserves review, as does a single cord ID appearing against two different inlet pairs. Preserve the rows until their physical and record relationships are resolved. The purpose is to identify a contradiction, not to infer the installed configuration from the spreadsheet alone. Record whether the resolution corrects an alias, removes a duplicate record, or changes an accepted endpoint relationship.

After the owner resolves the mapping, draft the two label faces from the same controlled row. If the policy uses local and remote wording, reverse the viewpoint-dependent endpoint lines appropriately while retaining the same cord ID. If the policy uses fixed end names, keep those end names fixed on both faces. Review the actual source fields and resulting text together. A correct row can still yield a wrong destination if a printing template maps the device and PDU columns incorrectly.

Worked case: an old hostname hides the correct inlet

In this fictional case, DC01 / H1 / R301 contains asset AST-G13-301. Cord CRD-G13-301 is recorded at PDU-G13-301 / BANK B / O04. The connection schedule names the far end gpu-old-g13 / PSU2, while the current asset register links the hostname gpu-new-g13 to AST-G13-301. Survey PWR-G13-301 preserves the old schedule value and the current alias relationship. The hostname difference alone is not treated as evidence that the cord moved or that the inlet changed.

The owner reviews the approved hostname-change record and the permitted endpoint evidence. In the fictional resolution, the old and new hostnames refer to the same asset, but the accepted device-side observation identifies PSU1. The decision therefore contains two distinct findings: the schedule uses a historical hostname, and its inlet suffix is incorrect. DEC-G13-301 supports the corrected pair PDU-G13-301 / BANK B / O04 to AST-G13-301 / PSU1. The original PSU2 claim remains in the discrepancy history rather than disappearing from the record.

The corrected faces retain CRD-G13-301 and the exact counterpart endpoint text. Final evidence checks the PDU-side face at its identified outlet and the device-side face at the accepted inlet. The connection schedule links the durable asset identity and records gpu-old-g13 as a historical alias where appropriate. Closeout cites the decision and both endpoint evidence references. It does not claim that the connection has been load-tested, that feed independence has been established, or that the worksheet describes an authorized unplugging sequence.

Adapt the record when the installation changes

A replacement device may reuse the same rack position and hostname while having a new asset ID. Review the cord's device endpoint through the replacement record instead of carrying forward the old asset automatically. Conversely, a power-module replacement may change a component identity while leaving the equipment's connection-position designation unchanged. Record the distinction used by the site's lifecycle policy. The schedule needs to show what the inlet reference identifies and which physical asset currently owns that position.

A cord replacement raises a related question: does the local ID identify the individual cord or the connection position? State the answer before editing history. If the ID belongs to the physical cord, issue or record the replacement's identity according to the local process and retain the former association. If a connection position has its own durable reference, keep that separate from the cord object. Combining both meanings in one field makes later failures and replacements difficult to trace.

For a partial survey, close the confirmed endpoint fields without presenting the whole relationship as verified. For example, the outlet and PDU may be established while the inlet remains unreadable. Keep the row's overall status pending, identify the missing endpoint detail, and assign an owner and permitted next method. This avoids repeating a completed local observation while preventing the incomplete pair from being published as an accepted connection. The next reviewer can see exactly which link still needs evidence.

Close with endpoint evidence, not just label quantities

A finished print batch proves that the intended faces were produced. It does not prove which cord received them, whether they are readable from the service view, or whether the underlying mapping was accepted. Final review should connect each face to its cord, each cord to the specific endpoint pair, and the pair to the controlling schedule and decision. Retain those links in the record instead of attaching an unlabeled folder of photographs and calling the connection checked.

Reconcile the included count after corrections. State how many cord relationships were reviewed, how many are accepted, and which remain unresolved. Check that correcting one row did not leave an obsolete assignment elsewhere in the schedule, including a former hostname or duplicate cord ID. Record the real verification date and the owner responsible for future changes. The resulting map should let another person identify the accepted endpoints from the record without inferring them from position, cable appearance, or a neighboring device.

Worked example

Example only: fictional connection records.

SCOPE: DC01 / H1 / R014
CORD      PDU / OUTLET    ASSET / INLET
PWR-0201  PDU-A01 / 08    AST-008421 / PSU1
PWR-0202  PDU-B01 / 12    AST-008421 / PSU2

The inlet suffix differentiates two connections to the same asset. The table is an identity map, not a switching sequence.

Common mistakes

• Recording only the PDU name.
• Assuming socket position proves outlet number.
• Using a hostname without the asset identity.
• Marking an inaccessible far end as confirmed.

Verification

• One row describes one cord relationship.
• Outlet names match the correct PDU documentation.
• Asset and inlet identifiers are both present.
• Cord IDs have no unexplained competing assignments.
• Evidence distinguishes observed and unconfirmed endpoints.

Worksheet: PDU outlet-to-PSU connection schedule

Filled example row - fictional; no live verification.

FAQs

Can the inlet simply be called left or right?

Prefer the equipment's own designation. If position is needed as an aid, state the viewing side explicitly.

Does an outlet-to-PSU map verify feed redundancy?

No. It records endpoints; power-path design and redundancy require separate evidence.

Can a hostname stay on the cord label?

It can be retained as a separate descriptive field if the local policy supports it, but the record should preserve the durable asset and exact inlet relationship. Define who updates the hostname text when it changes. Do not let a familiar hostname replace the identity needed to distinguish a physical device.

What if the two ends use different cord IDs?

Record each observed value and its endpoint, then open an identity discrepancy. Compare the approved schedule and permitted evidence to determine whether labels, records, or the proposed pairing are wrong. Do not choose one value solely because it matches the current spreadsheet or appears newer.

Should every visible socket become a row?

Only if the task's stated scope includes that outlet population and the worksheet is being used to account for it. This schedule focuses on cord relationships. If unconnected outlets are also inventoried, distinguish them explicitly from unknown connections and preserve the actual PDU outlet notation.

Can I reuse a valid endpoint observation after a change?

Keep it as historical evidence and assess whether the change affects the relationship it supports. An observation made before a device or cord replacement may no longer prove the current endpoint. Record the change boundary and obtain the accepted post-change evidence for any affected identity link.

More worked label examples

Two additional ways to apply this guide. Keep the exact identifiers and relationships consistent with your own approved records.

SCOPE: DC01 / H1 / R101; device AST-G13-101
CORD LABEL FACES
[CRD-G13-101 | PDU-G13-101 / O07 -> AST-G13-101 / PSU1]
[CRD-G13-102 | PDU-G13-102 / O12 -> AST-G13-101 / PSU2]

CONNECTION PAIRS
PDU-G13-101 / O07 === CRD-G13-101 === AST-G13-101 / PSU1
PDU-G13-102 / O12 === CRD-G13-102 === AST-G13-101 / PSU2

OUTLET ID = PDU identity + exact outlet marking
INLET ID  = asset identity + exact inlet/PSU marking
Record: PWR-G13-101 r2; evidence EV-G13-101-A / -B
Feed designations, if used, are separate verified fields

SCOPE: DC01 / H1 / R201; exception PWR-G13-201
VISIBLE FACE: [CRD-G13-201]
CONFIRMED END: PDU-G13-201 / BANK B / O03
CANDIDATE END: AST-G13-201 / PSU2; not yet verified

INITIAL RECORD
CRD-G13-201 | PDU-G13-201/B/O03 | INLET UNKNOWN

AFTER AUTHORIZED VERIFICATION, FICTIONAL RESULT
CRD-G13-201 | PDU-G13-201/B/O03 | AST-G13-201/PSU1
FINAL TWO-END TEXT
[CRD-G13-201 | TO AST-G13-201/PSU1]
[CRD-G13-201 | TO PDU-G13-201/B/O03]

Rejected candidate PSU2 retained in PWR-G13-201 history

Sources and applicability

• NetBox: Power outlets ↗

  Software record model for outlet identity and relationships; not a prescribed physical label format.

  Read scope and linked guides

Planning guides and companion documents

• Remote-hands cabinet identification brief

Related guides