[rt-users] Communication between RT and Zendesk
Hi all, we have been asked if RT works (well) together with Zendesk. I wanted to ask you all, if you have had previous experience with this. On my first impression, this could be difficult, since Zendesk uses the relation between reply and Ticket assoziation in the reply-to address (support+id...@subdomain.zendesk.com). Any experiences with this? greetings, l.r. -- RT Training in Seattle, June 19-20: http://bestpractical.com/training
Re: [rt-users] Installing RT via Puppet
Hi all, On 28.08.2012 14:41, Mr IT Guru wrote: Darin, I'm sure your a pretty busy - But I'll post updates and maybe you can take a look. If there is anyone else interested please feel free to get in touch. I hope the list admins do not feel that this is off topic - My clients just will not tolerate downtime that can be measured in minutes, so I'd like to know that I can spin up my favourite stacks with minimal effort and downtime - I'm sure other system admins will agree. Thanks I think it's a good topic. Important IMHO is to take the multiple scenarios into account in which RT can be found. I'll observe the progress and might also start contributing as puppet is a hot topic at ours atm. Greetings, LR
[rt-users] Again: RT using reply-to field to authenticate sender email
Hi all, sorry for sending it again, but so far our issue has not been discussed: on 29.03.2011: when sending an email to RT 3.8.8 we have the following problem: Situation: Queue address: service-...@example.org Sender address: sen...@example.com (known to RT, privileged, can create tickets, etc) Third party address: recipi...@example.net Sending an email with Cc to Queue address and have Reply-to Header set To: recipi...@example.net Cc: service-...@example.org Reply-to: recipi...@example.net yields Could not load a valid user for recipi...@example.net I think this may be a bug, because the original sender address is not used to auth against RT. I don't know how reply addresses are normally handled via RT, but auth'ing a user via the Reply-to header field is wrong because it is almost every time different from the From field and to Reply-to address may have no rights in RT in most cases. Imagine the following workflow: recipi...@example.net is a list, I want to inform it of something while creating a ticket using the Cc field. In this case I am the requestor, emails should go to me and the Reply-to address could be set as CC or whatever. Giving the Reply-to address access to RT is impractical because it is a list address only. Can anybody confirm or has a solution to this? Maybe there is a quick code-fix ;) greetings, l.r. RT Training Sessions (http://bestpractical.com/services/training.html) * Barcelona, Spain November 28 29, 2011
Re: [rt-users] Excepting certain queues from global scrips (my solution)
Hi all, I can only support this feature request. All other methods seem unsatisfactory to me atm. The proposed changes from Andrew make sense to me, altough I had not time to review and test the code. I can only encourage the coding team to interate such a feature. Have a nice weekend, LR On 08.08.2011 23:27, Daugherity, Andrew W wrote: So, after searching for ways to accomplish this, and seeing it is a common feature request (sometimes termed disable notifications for specific queues), with some existing solutions that accomplish it but weren't quite what I was looking for, I decided to write my own. It is implemented as custom condition Perl modules (installed under $RTHOME/local/lib/RT/Condition). After installation you get new conditions to use in your scrips like On Correspond (w/queue exceptions). The queue exception list is set in your RT_SiteConfig. You can have a mixture of truly global and global with exceptions scrips by changing which condition they use. I don't claim to be a Perl hacker so I'm sure there are some things that could be done better, but this works for me, at least with RT 4.0.1. Perhaps someone with better knowledge could explain why in my StatusChangeQueueExcept module I had to instantiate the other checks field-by-field instead of just passing $self. Attached is my README and the tarball, which I hope makes it through to the list. It is not yet packaged as an extension or plugin; I might do so if there is demand and I receive guidance as to which, if either, is appropriate. Andrew Daugherity Systems Analyst Division of Research, Texas AM University adaugher...@tamu.edu 2011 Training: http://bestpractical.com/services/training.html RT Training Sessions (http://bestpractical.com/services/training.html) * Washington DC, USA October 31 November 1, 2011 * Barcelona, Spain November 28 29, 2011
Re: [rt-users] Workflow for comments or changing CC to BCC
Hi Thomas, thank you for reply. I will fix that misconfiguration. See inline text: On 16.08.2011 18:13, Thomas Sibley wrote: On 08/16/2011 11:38 AM, Lars Reimann wrote: I assume comments are for internal messages only. But how is this realized? We for example have the same mail address for reply and comment. Having the same email address for reply and comments is wrong and a misconfiguration. It means email replies to mailed out comments will be interpreted as correspondence, not private comments. I'd like to change normal CC actions to BCC. Why? Because we have watcher groups for external and internal people. Both are member of administrative cc (BCC) at the moment. But the external people should _not_ receive (internal) comments and also do not want to be added as CC either (only BCC is acceptable for them and us). Maybe there is a better way to do this. If you know one, please share it. Thanks a lot, LR RT Training Sessions (http://bestpractical.com/services/training.html) * Chicago, IL, USA September 26 27, 2011 * San Francisco, CA, USA October 18 19, 2011 * Washington DC, USA October 31 November 1, 2011 * Melbourne VIC, Australia November 28 29, 2011 * Barcelona, Spain November 28 29, 2011
[rt-users] Workflow for comments or changing CC to BCC
Hi all, can someone please outline the workflow of comments in RT to me. I assume comments are for internal messages only. But how is this realized? We for example have the same mail address for reply and comment. I'd like to change normal CC actions to BCC. My question: can I change all occurences of CC in rt-3.8.8/lib/RT/Action/Notify to BCC without doing damage? I will of course not do this there, but in a local customization (where shall I put the file?) Thanks in advance, LR RT Training Sessions (http://bestpractical.com/services/training.html) * Chicago, IL, USA September 26 27, 2011 * San Francisco, CA, USA October 18 19, 2011 * Washington DC, USA October 31 November 1, 2011 * Melbourne VIC, Australia November 28 29, 2011 * Barcelona, Spain November 28 29, 2011
[rt-users] Split ticket including Quoted text
Hi, it should be possible to create a new ticket based on text of a current correspondence. This frequently occurs, if separate issues are addressed (requested) in one ticket. Thus, the need, to split the ticket. Requestors would have to be informed that their 2nd, 3rd,... issue is now addressed in a separate ticket, but this is already the case, if the requestors receive an opening mail. The only thing to do would be a create-button next to a correspondence / comments which opens a create dialog with the original requestor filled in ; same queue. The needless text (containing the original request) would have to be deleted manually. Has anyone suggestions for such an approach? e.g. Which templates to modify, etc? greetings, l.r.
[rt-users] Reuse RT System Saved Searches for all users
Hi, we stored a saved search (Tickets) in RT System's saved searches with the intention to make the search visible to all users. However, normal users cannot even see saved searches. We do require users to load them only and i gave the showsavedsearch and loadsavedsearch to every one. It is not clear to me which access rights are needed to enable users to see those system searches. If this is not possible via RT System's saved searches, how do I make searches available to all users? Otherwise every user has to save his/her own identical query which is impractical and most of our users do not want to understand detailed search semantics. greetings, l.r.
[rt-users] RT using reply-to field to authenticate sender email
Hi all, when sending an email to RT 3.8.8 we have the following problem: Situation: Queue address: service-...@example.org Sender address: sen...@example.com (known to RT, privileged, can create tickets, etc) Third party address: recipi...@example.net Sending an email with Cc to Queue address and have Reply-to Header set To: recipi...@example.net Cc: service-...@example.org Reply-to: recipi...@example.net yields Could not load a valid user for recipi...@example.net I think this may be a bug, because the original sender address is not used to auth against RT. I don't know how reply addresses are normally handled via RT, but auth'ing a user via the Reply-to header field is wrong because it is almost every time different from the From field and to Reply-to address may have no rights in RT in most cases. Imagine the following workflow: recipi...@example.net is a list, I want to inform it of something while creating a ticket using the Cc field. In this case I am the requestor, emails should go to me and the Reply-to address could be set as CC or whatever. Giving the Reply-to address access to RT is impractical because it is a list address only. Can anybody confirm or has a solution to this? Maybe there is a quick code-fix ;) greetings, l.r.
Re: [rt-users] Email Subject Header creating fragmented strings when decoded
Hi all., it seems to me like this problem is becoming more serious, as I recently recognized: - If a ticket queue name has the appropriate length (e.g. [longqueuename.longexampledomain.com #67894] Email Subject ) it happens, that the split occurs right in the middle of the ticket number, thus fragmenting it. This makes the RT unable to assign an fragmented answer to the correct ticket queue. Please consider fixing it and consider the problem serious. References https://rt.cpan.org/Public/Bug/Display.html?id=66713 https://rt.cpan.org/Public/Bug/Display.html?id=40027 greetings, l.r. On 03/18/2011 03:32 PM, Lars Reimann wrote: Sorry, forgot that... :( It is v3.8.8 (clean install) greetings, l.r. On 03/18/2011 03:28 PM, Kevin Falcone wrote: On Fri, Mar 18, 2011 at 03:14:17PM +0100, Lars Reimann wrote: the following problem is very annoying: RT Encodes Subject lines using the following concept: Which version of RT Original example Header Subject: =?UTF-8?B?W3NlcnZpY2UubWV0YXdheXMubmV0ICM2NzAyOF0gU3BlaWNoZXJwbGF0eiBF?= =?UTF-8?B?cmjDtmh1bmcgd2FzbWFpbjogNTAwIEdC?= The header is split into 2 parts: 1st part decoded: [Queue Name #Ticket nubmer] First part of subject line 2nd part decoded: Second part of subject line Completely decoded string: [Queue Name #Ticket nubmer] First part of subject line_Second part of subject line The underscore (_) marks an additional space character which is introduced into ALL emails on decoding the two UTF parts. I double checked with decoding UTF in python. Results: When using 2 UTF parts, a decode introduces an additional space. When using only ONE UTF-string (the above subject w/o padding and UTF header) the decode is done correctly! If would be very glad the resolve this problem. If RT could use only one UTF string, the problem would go away. How can we do that? And: does anyone have the same problem with email clients (we use evolution and thunderbird, but most likely other clients are also affected). p.s. It's unclear to me when UTF encoding is used. Sometimes the Subject line is not UTF encoded and uses ASCII. Perhaps it depends on non-ASCII characters within the subject. greetings, l.r. -- Lars Reimann System Engineer Metaways Infosystems GmbH Pickhuben 2, 20457 Hamburg Tel: +49 (0)40 31 70 31 - 527 Fax: +49 (0)40 31 70 31 - 927 l.reim...@metaways.de www.metaways.de Metaways Infosystems GmbH - Sitz: D-22967 Tremsbüttel Handelsregister: Amtsgericht Lübeck, HRB 4508 AH Geschäftsführung: Hermann Thaele, Lüder-H. Thaele
[rt-users] Allow complete Domain access to RT
Hey all, just a little question before the weekend: Does RT support the possibility to grant everyone sending email from a specific domain (e.g. *@example.org) the right to post to a specific queue? In my opinion this could be a minor security risk using forged sender addresses. Btw, can you think of, or have in place any other protection mechanisms to prevent acceptance of forged sender addresses? greetings, l.r.
[rt-users] Question about logical workflow
Hi all, in RT 3.6.6 we had the following situation: We have a Watcher which monitors a Queue for activity. In some cases, the watcher himself identifies a problem first and creates a ticket to inform the others, thus becoming the requestor. In this case, he gets emails twice. Is this desired behavior? Has it changed in 3.8.8? If no: how can we prevent doubling of emails. greetings, l.r.
[rt-users] Email Subject Header creating fragmented strings when decoded
Hi all, the following problem is very annoying: RT Encodes Subject lines using the following concept: Original example Header Subject: =?UTF-8?B?W3NlcnZpY2UubWV0YXdheXMubmV0ICM2NzAyOF0gU3BlaWNoZXJwbGF0eiBF?= =?UTF-8?B?cmjDtmh1bmcgd2FzbWFpbjogNTAwIEdC?= The header is split into 2 parts: 1st part decoded: [Queue Name #Ticket nubmer] First part of subject line 2nd part decoded: Second part of subject line Completely decoded string: [Queue Name #Ticket nubmer] First part of subject line_Second part of subject line The underscore (_) marks an additional space character which is introduced into ALL emails on decoding the two UTF parts. I double checked with decoding UTF in python. Results: When using 2 UTF parts, a decode introduces an additional space. When using only ONE UTF-string (the above subject w/o padding and UTF header) the decode is done correctly! If would be very glad the resolve this problem. If RT could use only one UTF string, the problem would go away. How can we do that? And: does anyone have the same problem with email clients (we use evolution and thunderbird, but most likely other clients are also affected). p.s. It's unclear to me when UTF encoding is used. Sometimes the Subject line is not UTF encoded and uses ASCII. Perhaps it depends on non-ASCII characters within the subject. greetings, l.r.
Re: [rt-users] Email Subject Header creating fragmented strings when decoded
Sorry, forgot that... :( It is v3.8.8 (clean install) greetings, l.r. On 03/18/2011 03:28 PM, Kevin Falcone wrote: On Fri, Mar 18, 2011 at 03:14:17PM +0100, Lars Reimann wrote: the following problem is very annoying: RT Encodes Subject lines using the following concept: Which version of RT Original example Header Subject: =?UTF-8?B?W3NlcnZpY2UubWV0YXdheXMubmV0ICM2NzAyOF0gU3BlaWNoZXJwbGF0eiBF?= =?UTF-8?B?cmjDtmh1bmcgd2FzbWFpbjogNTAwIEdC?= The header is split into 2 parts: 1st part decoded: [Queue Name #Ticket nubmer] First part of subject line 2nd part decoded: Second part of subject line Completely decoded string: [Queue Name #Ticket nubmer] First part of subject line_Second part of subject line The underscore (_) marks an additional space character which is introduced into ALL emails on decoding the two UTF parts. I double checked with decoding UTF in python. Results: When using 2 UTF parts, a decode introduces an additional space. When using only ONE UTF-string (the above subject w/o padding and UTF header) the decode is done correctly! If would be very glad the resolve this problem. If RT could use only one UTF string, the problem would go away. How can we do that? And: does anyone have the same problem with email clients (we use evolution and thunderbird, but most likely other clients are also affected). p.s. It's unclear to me when UTF encoding is used. Sometimes the Subject line is not UTF encoded and uses ASCII. Perhaps it depends on non-ASCII characters within the subject. greetings, l.r. -- Lars Reimann System Engineer Metaways Infosystems GmbH Pickhuben 2, 20457 Hamburg Tel: +49 (0)40 31 70 31 - 527 Fax: +49 (0)40 31 70 31 - 927 l.reim...@metaways.de www.metaways.de Metaways Infosystems GmbH - Sitz: D-22967 Tremsbüttel Handelsregister: Amtsgericht Lübeck, HRB 4508 AH Geschäftsführung: Hermann Thaele, Lüder-H. Thaele
[rt-users] Modifying stuff with CLI, especially rights
Hi all, i've done some digging since we are having the need to alter / edit stuff within RT programatically via the built-in CLI. However, I find the general documentation sparse and can only agree with previous questions which have gone unanswered / unsolved. Modifying stuff such as rights for a user should be possible with CLI, but syntax and method is still unknown (at least to me) after a close look at things. What we (and basically other users) need would be the approach to add users to specific groups and modify access rights for those groups (its a pain to clicky clicky on the web-interface for admins). I understand that the CLI is basically a wrapper for the underlying perl code. I would rather use the CLI to be database conform / rt conform than devising a way to solve my problems in an unclean way. Please update / tell us more about solving things via the CLI. Updating the Wiki may be also a good step, but that can also be done by me, once the general approach / scope is clear. e.g. References: Batch *Rights* modification with *CLI* http://www.gossamer-threads.com/lists/rt/users/90712?search_string=rights%20cli;#90712 Dec 10, 2009, 6:49 AM Using *CLI* to modify group *rights* on a queue - is it possible? http://www.gossamer-threads.com/lists/rt/users/84106?search_string=rights%20cli;#84106Mar 20, 2009, 9:44 AM greetings, l.r.
[rt-users] rt-3.8.9: Mason missing
Hi all, first, thanks for releasing RT-3.8.9. I wanted to try it out immediately but our server environment complains about a missing dependency (Mason): SOME DEPENDENCIES WERE MISSING. STANDALONE missing dependencies: HTTP::Server::Simple::Mason = 0.14 ...MISSING rt-3.8.8 did not complain about that. My question is, do we have to include that dependency in our system-wide perl (we are using apache as webserver) or can I turn off that check? That would involve rolling out and compiling some new perl packages. thanks in advance, l.r.
Re: [rt-users] rt-3.8.9: HTTP::Server::Simple::Mason missing
Hi kevin, how can I skip it then? ;) greetings, l.r. On 02/17/2011 05:09 PM, Kevin Falcone wrote: On Thu, Feb 17, 2011 at 12:45:34PM +0100, Lars Reimann wrote: Hi all, first, thanks for releasing RT-3.8.9. I wanted to try it out immediately but our server environment complains about a missing dependency (Mason): SOME DEPENDENCIES WERE MISSING. STANDALONE missing dependencies: HTTP::Server::Simple::Mason= 0.14 ...MISSING rt-3.8.8 did not complain about that. My question is, do we have to include that dependency in our system-wide perl (we are using apache as webserver) or can I turn off that check? That would involve rolling out and compiling some new perl packages. If you're never going to use the standalone server, you can skip it. It is needed in parallel with the other encoding fixes in RT -kevin -- Lars Reimann System Engineer Metaways Infosystems GmbH Pickhuben 2, 20457 Hamburg Tel: +49 (0)40 31 70 31 - 527 Fax: +49 (0)40 31 70 31 - 927 l.reim...@metaways.de www.metaways.de Metaways und das Tine 2.0 Team auf der CeBIT in Hannover – Besuchen Sie uns in der Zeit vom 01. bis 05. März 2011 im Open Source Park in der Halle 2 am Stand D44. Wir freuen uns auf Ihren Besuch! Metaways Infosystems GmbH - Sitz: D-22967 Tremsbüttel Handelsregister: Amtsgericht Lübeck, HRB 4508 AH Geschäftsführung: Hermann Thaele, Lüder-H. Thaele
[rt-users] CLI, http auth, https
Hello all, how can I use the CLI with http auth (user/password dialog on our RT homepage)? I assume https is supported out of the box by specifying the URL on the export RTSERVER=your.rt3.installation variable? greetings, l.r.
