If you don't mind the pain, you could try to digest what we built - documented 
at http://arsweb4.ars.unt.edu/index_prod.htm under the section "UNT-Specific 
Documentation for Multi-Tenancy in the UNT BMC Remedy ITSM 7.x system."
It has held up in production for over three years now, so we are carrying it 
over to the upgraded 7.6.04.01 system... as-is.

I have not seen a practical use yet in our environment for the extension to 
Vendor Assignee Groups (60900) in 7.6.04; we continue to push what we need into 
Assignee Groups (112) instead.  Vendor Assignee Groups might turn out to be the 
correct tool to accomplish what you need to do in your environment, however.

I recall hearing about a place in 7.6.04 to specify one company as 
hierarchically above another, but have not had time to see if it exists.  That 
might help me to create a super-company over all of my separate companies 
defined for each directorate in the Computing Center.  Assuming that worked, I 
would be surprised if it could cross company-type boundaries.  I don't even 
know if it made it into the release, given that the multi-tenancy doc has not 
changed since 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:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG] On Behalf Of Andrew C Goodall
Sent: Thursday, July 28, 2011 1:44 PM
To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG
Subject: ITSM multi tenancy - customer company vs operating company needs

**
ITSM 7.5.01

We are a fairly large enterprise and use multi-tenancy to control access to 
multiple operating companies' data.
So we do not give any one unrestricted access to control access to the 
different operating companies.
However, our associates from both companies - particularly our central Service 
Desk work with multiple customer companies and have to open incidents for those 
customers.

BMC support is telling us that we would have to add all those hundreds of 
customer companies to every ones access restrictions for that company to show 
up on the customer selection.

In our current environment, I have a workaround where we add public to those 
customer company records - but this is not sustainable long term.

I was hoping this would have changed in 7.6.04 but it does not, so all I can do 
is open an RFC :(

Does anyone else have this issue with the inflexibility of access restrictions 
between different company types, i.e. needing operating companies separate but 
customer companies open and public?

Does anyone else recommend a solution?
I'm currently adding public manually. But I'm thinking of adding a filter to 
push this on submission of Customer Type Company.


Regards,

Andrew Goodall
Software Engineer 2 | Development Services |  jcpenney . www.jcp.com 
<http://www.jcp.com/>  |


The information transmitted is intended only for the person or entity to which 
it is addressed and
may contain confidential and/or privileged material. If the reader of this 
message is not the intended
recipient, you are hereby notified that your access is unauthorized, and any 
review, dissemination,
distribution or copying of this message including any attachments is strictly 
prohibited. If you are not
the intended recipient, please contact the sender and delete the material from 
any computer.


_attend WWRUG11 www.wwrug.com ARSlist: "Where the Answers Are"_

_______________________________________________________________________________
UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives at www.arslist.org
attend wwrug11 www.wwrug.com ARSList: "Where the Answers Are"

Reply via email to