<RANT> I finally dug far enough into the Support Web to reach the docs for ITSM 7.6.03, and sure enough, they have STILL failed to re-add Login Name to the customer search tool set as I have been asking for ever since the Early Access program to ITSM 7.0 - when we first saw that it had been dropped after Help Desk 6.x. Since that means that every layer of the ticketing interface has to be customized in every module that we wish to deploy for production use; there's nothing to look forward to in 7.6.03 for me but more pain. </RANT>
Back to work in slimy guts of 7.6.00... Christopher Strauss, Ph.D. Call Tracking Administration Manager University of North Texas Computing & IT Center http://itsm.unt.edu/ From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) [mailto:arsl...@arslist.org] On Behalf Of strauss Sent: Tuesday, August 31, 2010 9:59 AM To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG Subject: Re: SRM 7.6 Destroying ITSM 7.0.3 Email Generation? ** According to the 7.6 docs the notification engine uses business hours and business holidays to regulate support staff notifications. I cannot say if it is really working however - we have not gotten to the point of thoroughly testing notifications yet. I'm still trying to get our customizations working with the Incident module, which is 4 times as complex in 7.6 as in 7.0 and yet still lacks the ability to locate the customer on Login Name (as in Help Desk/ITSM 4, 5, 6 - dropped in 7), which we MUST have. I continue to be _forced_ to customize due to that glaring shortcoming in the 7.x design. As for SLM, the OOTB filters still push through NTE:Notifier; I cloned many of them to create a whole new set of notifications for Response times to match the ones for Resolution - the OOTB integration between Incident and SLM was only half-baked and required a LOT of extensions. Christopher Strauss, Ph.D. Call Tracking Administration Manager University of North Texas Computing & IT Center http://itsm.unt.edu/ From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) [mailto:arsl...@arslist.org] On Behalf Of Matthew Perrault Sent: Monday, August 30, 2010 1:15 PM To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG Subject: Re: SRM 7.6 Destroying ITSM 7.0.3 Email Generation? ** Hey Chris, Your description of how the ITSM 7.0/7.1 (ITSP v3/v4) Notification system works is correct, With a couple clarification pieces: The NTE:Notifier form actually pushes records via a filter Notify Action to the email engine (probably what you meant :) ). It would also then push to the NTE:Notifier Log form, which is what the Notification Audit Log table read from. Also, the NTE:SYS-Individual NT Control would look at Business Hours for a person. It would queue emails up, and send them when the current time was within the specified business hours. The SLM Module for ITSM 7.X does NOT feed through the NTE: Notification module. It has it's own notification forms. Of course you can configure it to push through to the NTE stuff as a Push fields. My question, does 7.6 have the same functionality to address business hours that 7.1 has? Thanks, Matt P. From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) [mailto:arsl...@arslist.org] On Behalf Of strauss Sent: Monday, August 30, 2010 10:37 AM To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG Subject: Re: SRM 7.6 Destroying ITSM 7.0.3 Email Generation? ** You are going to want to look at the BMC ITSM 7.6 Notification Engine Guide to see what was changed. There are detailed flow diagrams and process descriptions for 7.6 that were only available for 7.0 in some of the training material we got at UserWorld 2007. The entire notification module (like several other parts of ITSM), was _significantly_ re-designed for 7.6. My upgraded ITSM system - from 7.0 to 7.6 - seems to have made all of the changes necessary to process notifications through the new plumbing. I am not surprised, however, that installing SRM 7.6 on top of ITSM 7.0 destroys the old plumbing and silences ITSM 7.0; I find that to be typical behavior for BMC application upgrade installers. Basically, the SRM 7.6 installation converted your notification sub-system from 7.0 to 7.6, and ITSM 7.0 no longer injects records correctly into it. If I understand it correctly, in 7.0 the NTE:SYS-NT Process Control form received ALL notification events from the various ITSM apps, and sent group notifications to NTE:SYS-Group NT Control, where notifications were generated for the individuals in the groups and sent to NTE:SYS-Individual NT Control. On-call group paging events identified in NTE:SYS-Group NT Control were sent directly to NTE:Notifier. The NTE:SYS-NT Process Control form sent all individual notification events directly to NTE:SYS-Individual NT Control, where they joined the notifications for individuals in groups. All of the notifications in NTE:SYS-Individual NT Control were then passed to NTE:Notifier. Only the notifications that reach NTE:Notifier get read by the email engine and sent out, and then the NTE:Notifier records remain as links to the Incident or other request as they are the records referenced in the URLs passed in notification emails. In 7.6, the NTE:SYS-Group NT Control and NTE:SYS-Individual NT Control forms DO NOT EXIST (new installs), and are not used in upgraded systems. Notifications go directly from NTE:SYS-NT Process Control to NTE:Notifier and a lot of new workflow replaces that which used to use the old forms to separate and stage notifications in 7.0. Since the NTE:SYS-Group NT Control and NTE:SYS-Individual NT Control forms STILL EXIST on an upgraded 7.0 to 7.6 system, you probably still have ITSM 7.0 workflow pushing records into them that is no longer reaching the NTE:Notifier form for some reason. You may have to run a test upgrade of a clone of your ITSM 7.0 system to 7.6 in order to see (and obtain copies to migrate) the modified workflow that ITSM 7.6 uses to interface with the 7.6 notification sub-system. Christopher Strauss, Ph.D. Call Tracking Administration Manager University of North Texas Computing & IT Center http://itsm.unt.edu/ From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) [mailto:arsl...@arslist.org] On Behalf Of Pierson, Shawn Sent: Sunday, August 29, 2010 10:41 AM To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG Subject: SRM 7.6 Destroying ITSM 7.0.3 Email Generation? ** Good morning, I upgraded our SRM 2.2 install to 7.6, and everything seemed to have went well until we started trying to use ITSM and noticed that it is incapable of generating emails. The Email Engine itself works, so our custom applications that don't use the NTE subsystem are fine, but most other emails from ITSM simply don't get generated. In my Filter log, I see (in the example of Change Management) that it gets to the filter CHG:CRQ:NotificationGenerator_899_ModifyNotificationProcessControl`! and pushes the data correctly, but after that I don't see anything occur where it would send an email. I do see that the Change Manager information is pulled back in NTE:NPC:GetPreferences_150_PeopleSupportStaff, but beyond that it doesn't really do anything. So basically, my Production system is dead in the water because of this. We're on ITSM 7.0.3 Patch 9 and Patch 7000, and this only became an issue after upgrading to SRM 7.6 Patch 1. Unfortunately, it looks like SRM modified thousands of ITSM forms, fields, and workflow, so there is no good way to tell what could have been affected by this. Also unfortunately, BMC support has been less than helpful, trying to tell me it's just a performance problem, and not listening to me and for some reason thinking that it only affects Approval emails. Thanks, Shawn Pierson Remedy Developer | Southern Union Private and confidential as detailed here<http://www.sug.com/disclaimers/default.htm#Mail>. If you cannot access hyperlink, please e-mail sender. _attend WWRUG10 www.wwrug.com ARSlist: "Where the Answers Are"_ _attend WWRUG10 www.wwrug.com ARSlist: "Where the Answers Are"_ _attend WWRUG10 www.wwrug.com ARSlist: "Where the Answers Are"_ _attend WWRUG10 www.wwrug.com ARSlist: "Where the Answers Are"_ _______________________________________________________________________________ UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives at www.arslist.org attend wwrug10 www.wwrug.com ARSlist: "Where the Answers Are"
