[rt-users] Removing attachments from tickets
This is probably a FAQ, but I'm afraid I didn't find it written up as one. In the interest of keeping the database size down, I would like to be able to remove attachments folks have sent in from tickets without disturbing the tickets themselves in any other way. I seem to remember having done this once by looking up something and updating the content of the field that contained the attachment to be NULL, but I didn't write it up at the time and can't remember for the life of me. Is there a better way to do this? If not, I'd appreciate a run-through on how to do it again. Best regards, -- Atro Tossavainen (Mr.) / The Institute of Biotechnology at Systems Analyst, Techno-Amish / the University of Helsinki, Finland, +358-9-19158939 UNIX Dinosaur / employs me, but my opinions are my own. URL : http : / / www . helsinki . fi / %7E atossava / NO FILE ATTACHMENTS Discover RT's hidden secrets with RT Essentials from O'Reilly Media. Buy a copy at http://rtbook.bestpractical.com
Re: [rt-users] RT Emails Being Blocked by Various Providers
To: Atro Tossavainen atoss...@cc.helsinki.fi cc: rt-users@lists.bestpractical.com No need to copy me personally, list only is just fine. and that all entries should be valid, which seems really hard to grasp to many ISPs And as such, it is indeed stupid to penalize their customers. To use PTR as one of many rules in spam analysis or grey-listing is reasonable, to flat-out deny SMTP is asinine. It all depends on your point of view. If you really feel the urge to throw endless resources into analysing mail you knew far earlier you would be rejecting anyway, be my guest. Just don't expect everybody else to do that. If you thought mail from incompetently managed networks is best left avoided, that's one data point you could use for making that judgement. Some people figure accepting mail from zombie farms is a good idea, too. It all depends on what you, as the mail server owner, think is a good idea. I can't make that judgement for you, but as James Moseley put it in this thread: Some mail environments are even more strict and require that the rDNS entry of the IP address match with the corresponding forward DNS record. (Which is, perhaps not quite incidentally, in line with Section 2.1 of RFC 1912.) With that said, I think it's reasonable that an owner of a mail server sending legit email make sure that the IP address of their mail server have an rDNS entry. Amen. -- Atro Tossavainen (Mr.) / The Institute of Biotechnology at Systems Analyst, Techno-Amish / the University of Helsinki, Finland, +358-9-19158939 UNIX Dinosaur / employs me, but my opinions are my own. URL : http : / / www . helsinki . fi / %7E atossava / NO FILE ATTACHMENTS ___ http://lists.bestpractical.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/rt-users Community help: http://wiki.bestpractical.com Commercial support: sa...@bestpractical.com Discover RT's hidden secrets with RT Essentials from O'Reilly Media. Buy a copy at http://rtbook.bestpractical.com
Re: [rt-users] RT Emails Being Blocked by Various Providers
On Fri, 6 Mar 2009, Jerrad Pierce wrote: PTR is for reverse mapping from IP to name. Yahoo stupidly requires this. Inability to configure PTR records is a sign of incompetence. Rejecting mail from incompetently managed networks (based on whichever definition of incompetence you're comfortable with) may be a good idea. RFC 1912, while informational only, states that all IP addresses should have corresponding PTR entries (and that all entries should be valid, which seems really hard to grasp to many ISPs). It dates from early 1996. Section 2.1 in RFC 1912 deals with this issue. The reverse DNS does not need to be anything fancy, it only needs to exist (and be valid). Saying that somebody is stupid for requiring this is a bit like writing to the various DNSBLs of dynamically assigned IP address space and saying that they have to remove your dynamically assigned IP address from their list just because you say so (while admitting it yourself that it is indeed dynamically assigned, helpfully making their point for them)... -- Atro Tossavainen (Mr.) / The Institute of Biotechnology at Systems Analyst, Techno-Amish / the University of Helsinki, Finland, +358-9-19158939 UNIX Dinosaur / employs me, but my opinions are my own. URL : http : / / www . helsinki . fi / %7E atossava / NO FILE ATTACHMENTS ___ http://lists.bestpractical.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/rt-users Community help: http://wiki.bestpractical.com Commercial support: sa...@bestpractical.com Discover RT's hidden secrets with RT Essentials from O'Reilly Media. Buy a copy at http://rtbook.bestpractical.com
Re: [rt-users] RT Emails Being Blocked by Various Providers
On Fri, 6 Mar 2009, Timothy Kolosky wrote: For some strange reason, it seems that [some] are not receiving any of our emails that are generated by RT. Are you getting any actual hard bounces of mail sent by RT? If so, what do they say? -- Atro Tossavainen (Mr.) / The Institute of Biotechnology at Systems Analyst, Techno-Amish / the University of Helsinki, Finland, +358-9-19158939 UNIX Dinosaur / employs me, but my opinions are my own. URL : http : / / www . helsinki . fi / %7E atossava / NO FILE ATTACHMENTS ___ http://lists.bestpractical.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/rt-users Community help: http://wiki.bestpractical.com Commercial support: sa...@bestpractical.com Discover RT's hidden secrets with RT Essentials from O'Reilly Media. Buy a copy at http://rtbook.bestpractical.com
[rt-users] Large, frequent file attachments and RT
Hello all, I have an application in mind where requestors would frequently need to submit file attachments alongside their requests, and some of these files will be rather large. The ticket handlers would need to use those files and also to manage groups of files by any particular requestor. Including the files themselves within the RT database seems like a poor idea, and I get the impression I may not be the first one with such requirements. I was wondering if anybody could point me in the direction of mods to RT (or something) that will store references to the files only within the database and store the files themselves on an actual file system? Regards, -- Atro Tossavainen (Mr.) / The Institute of Biotechnology at Systems Analyst, Techno-Amish / the University of Helsinki, Finland, +358-9-19158939 UNIX Dinosaur / employs me, but my opinions are my own. URL : http : / / www . helsinki . fi / %7E atossava / NO FILE ATTACHMENTS ___ http://lists.bestpractical.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/rt-users Community help: http://wiki.bestpractical.com Commercial support: sa...@bestpractical.com Discover RT's hidden secrets with RT Essentials from O'Reilly Media. Buy a copy at http://rtbook.bestpractical.com
[rt-users] Scrip to selectively autorespond?
I was wondering if anybody has already dealt with the issue of RT either autoresponding to all incoming messages or not autoresponding to any at all. Specifically, I'd like to try to implement recommendations of RFC 3834 in the autoresponder - such as, if RT gets mail from another auto- responder that is easily identifiable as such, to stop generating loops. Any pointers will be welcome. -- Atro Tossavainen (Mr.) / The Institute of Biotechnology at Systems Analyst, Techno-Amish / the University of Helsinki, Finland, +358-9-19158939 UNIX Dinosaur / employs me, but my opinions are my own. URL : http : / / www . helsinki . fi / %7E atossava / NO FILE ATTACHMENTS ___ http://lists.bestpractical.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/rt-users Community help: http://wiki.bestpractical.com Commercial support: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Discover RT's hidden secrets with RT Essentials from O'Reilly Media. Buy a copy at http://rtbook.bestpractical.com
[rt-users] Contents partially missing from some tickets after upgrade
I recently upgraded from 3.4.5 to 3.6.6. I now have a situation where some of my tickets aren't showing the entire contents in the web interface. This has happened to some of the old tickets, and some new ones as well. The symptoms are that all correspondence isn't showing up. When any new material is added to such a ticket, the Updated: field gets updated to show the time and date and the updater, and the update is mailed out to AdminCCs as I've requested, but it can't be viewed in the web interface at all. All help welcome. -- Atro Tossavainen (Mr.) / The Institute of Biotechnology at Systems Analyst, Techno-Amish / the University of Helsinki, Finland, +358-9-19158939 UNIX Dinosaur / employs me, but my opinions are my own. URL : http : / / www . helsinki . fi / %7E atossava / NO FILE ATTACHMENTS ___ http://lists.bestpractical.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/rt-users Community help: http://wiki.bestpractical.com Commercial support: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Discover RT's hidden secrets with RT Essentials from O'Reilly Media. Buy a copy at http://rtbook.bestpractical.com
Re: [rt-users] Contents partially missing from some tickets after upgrade
Toby, This sounds familiar, did you run rt-setup-database-3.6 ? Yeah, I tried to. It's not like I'm not reading the manuals when I do stuff like this. :-) The etc/upgrade/3.5.1 directory is empty in the rt-3.6.6 distribution. I re-downloaded to verify. There's nothing but content in there; the 3.1.0, 3.3.0 and 3.3.11 directories have schema and acl modification files as well. For whatever it's worth, this is on CentOS 4.x x86_64, and I've installed RT manually rather than from prebuilt rpms. -- Atro Tossavainen (Mr.) / The Institute of Biotechnology at Systems Analyst, Techno-Amish / the University of Helsinki, Finland, +358-9-19158939 UNIX Dinosaur / employs me, but my opinions are my own. URL : http : / / www . helsinki . fi / %7E atossava / NO FILE ATTACHMENTS ___ http://lists.bestpractical.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/rt-users Community help: http://wiki.bestpractical.com Commercial support: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Discover RT's hidden secrets with RT Essentials from O'Reilly Media. Buy a copy at http://rtbook.bestpractical.com
Re: [rt-users] Not to include original message when reply
How can I prevent RT to not include the original message on the message body of a reply. For example, a user opens a ticket, then another user replies to the ticket. When click Reply on the RT interface the original message is included. How can I have RT to automatically not include the original message? Use the Reply link at the top of the ticket rather than the one in a piece of correspondence. -- Atro Tossavainen (Mr.) / The Institute of Biotechnology at Systems Analyst, Techno-Amish / the University of Helsinki, Finland, +358-9-19158939 UNIX Dinosaur / employs me, but my opinions are my own. URL : http : / / www . helsinki . fi / %7E atossava / NO FILE ATTACHMENTS ___ http://lists.bestpractical.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/rt-users Community help: http://wiki.bestpractical.com Commercial support: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Discover RT's hidden secrets with RT Essentials from O'Reilly Media. Buy a copy at http://rtbook.bestpractical.com
Re: [rt-users] RT 4
[Thanks for not cc'ing me explicitly, one copy via the list will do just fine.] well, whether it sucks or not, when you give your staff access to some software, they begin using it, that's all - then when you detect weaknesses in the soft, As far as I can see, the weakness, as you call it, is not intrinsic to RT, but should be addressed at the Web browser level, and as Toby Darling already pointed out, there is an extension to Firefox that solves the problem in a much more global manner. I don't know about you and/or your users, but I practically never use the RT web interface to answer tickets - I use email nearly 100% of the time, precisely because I have much better tools available for writing email (including, but not limited to, support for temporary saves and therefore crash resistance). Attempting to address this issue in RT is, in my opinion, simply not the right place to do it. (Of course I should mention that our RT is configured so that every- body in the IT support team get copies of new tickets and all ticket correspondence in their email already. I do realize doing this would be impractical or even impossible with a wider support personnel base and/or significantly larger amounts of ticket traffic.) -- Atro Tossavainen (Mr.) / The Institute of Biotechnology at Systems Analyst, Techno-Amish / the University of Helsinki, Finland, +358-9-19158939 UNIX Dinosaur / employs me, but my opinions are my own. URL : http : / / www . helsinki . fi / %7E atossava / NO FILE ATTACHMENTS ___ http://lists.bestpractical.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/rt-users Community help: http://wiki.bestpractical.com Commercial support: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Discover RT's hidden secrets with RT Essentials from O'Reilly Media. Buy a copy at http://rtbook.bestpractical.com
Re: [rt-users] RT 4
my users would deeply appreciate being able to temporarily SAVE a draft ticket, just to protect against a power shortage, sudden interruptions, and such; Writing ticket responses in the web interface sucks. Just use email instead so you get the facilities of whatever email client you're using. -- Atro Tossavainen (Mr.) / The Institute of Biotechnology at Systems Analyst, Techno-Amish / the University of Helsinki, Finland, +358-9-19158939 UNIX Dinosaur / employs me, but my opinions are my own. URL : http : / / www . helsinki . fi / %7E atossava / NO FILE ATTACHMENTS ___ http://lists.bestpractical.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/rt-users Community help: http://wiki.bestpractical.com Commercial support: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Discover RT's hidden secrets with RT Essentials from O'Reilly Media. Buy a copy at http://rtbook.bestpractical.com
Re: [rt-users] RT 4
On Fri, 4 May 2007, Mathew Snyder wrote: * Spam!!! So, you want RT to send spam? ;) Some of the suggestions presented in this conversation would actually lead to that. If RT were to contain a moderation system and send anything in response to Rejected tickets, the rejection notices would go to the owners of forged sender addresses in the spams and viruses you would reject. That's called backscatter and will get your system listed as a sender of spam in many places. Don't do it, don't even think of doing it. Likewise for sender verification / challenge-response schemes in any form. Challenges for messages one has not sent are spam to the owner of the forged sender address. If anybody reading this operates a mail system that does challenge/ response, or operates a spam filter such as Barracuda Spam Firewall or MailMarshal that in its default configuration accuses the owner of the forged sender address of having sent you the spam, now is the time to stop. The accusations are spam to the unrelated third parties. -- Atro Tossavainen (Mr.) / The Institute of Biotechnology at Systems Analyst, Techno-Amish / the University of Helsinki, Finland, +358-9-19158939 UNIX Dinosaur / employs me, but my opinions are my own. URL : http : / / www . helsinki . fi / %7E atossava / NO FILE ATTACHMENTS ___ http://lists.bestpractical.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/rt-users Community help: http://wiki.bestpractical.com Commercial support: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Discover RT's hidden secrets with RT Essentials from O'Reilly Media. Buy a copy at http://rtbook.bestpractical.com
