Adam Toms

Hi all, This is a bit of a strange request. But I was wondering if if an email matched a specific set of rules, i.e sender address and subject that it would allow a ticket to be resolved if the rules matched configured in the business process engine? My reasoning for this is we have a need in IT to vet computer room access to ensure the person or persons requesting access have carried out the right training, aware of IT Security Polices etc. Then assuming all checks pass it will go to another part of the business to eventually provide that person or persons requiring access. I will be configuring that to send an email to that part of the business with the summary description and custom fields injected into an email so they can carry out the access request, knowing that the receipt of that email means the person or persons requiring access have been vetted and the right procedures have been followed. That part of the business doesn't have a need as of yet for Hornbill Agent access or a queue to manage their tickets. So in order for the ticket to capture the full audit trail and the end to end process, if the area of the business replies back to that email - saying access granted. Could that then engage the resolution node in the business process and ultimately resolve the ticket if subject and sender address is configured in the business process engine to allow that to happen? Any help or advice on this would be gratefully received. This isn't something we've needed to try and do until now. Kind Regards Adam

Hi @Steve Giller I was wondering if there was any progress on this issue? Thanks in advance. Adam

Thanks @Steve Giller for coming back to us so quickly. As per Gareth's post above we have a lot of these views configured in the same way. So would also prefer to wait. We also use the resolve by previous month field in our SQL widgets and dashboards in the advanced analytics section. Because of how they are configured it's difficult to work out in the same way whether the advanced analytics area is also impacted by this. Are you able to advise if that's the case at all? If you need me to raise a support call, please let me know. Many Thanks Adam

Hello all, I'm not sure whether this is a fault but we are starting to look at reporting and we do use the resolve by previous month in views in Service Manager. I can't see anything wrong with our configuration but it brings back Dec 2020 data. I'm trying to establish if we're the only ones with this issue, or whether other customers are also experiencing this issue? If it's the latter I will raise a support ticket. To help with this please see the attached screenshots. Thanks in advance. Kind Regards Adam

Hi All, We've recently dipped our toe into enterprise service management, by opening up Hornbill to more than just our IT team. We've now got our Facilities team using Hornbill for their Incidents and Requests and this is working very well. There is a genuine need for them to have stored contacts that wouldn't need access to the portal, but there are some external customers that they may need to email. I've studied the wiki page on contacts: Contacts - Hornbill These contacts would only be relevant for our Facilities team and our IT department wouldn't require access. I can see the ability to mark these contacts as private. But i believe this only makes the contact visible to an individual. But all members of the Facilities team would need to be able to see these contacts. Is there a way of locking these contacts down by support queue? If not I think it would be a great enhancement for us and I'm sure other customers wishing to use this feature. Kind Regards Adam

Thanks @James Ainsworth for clarifying this. I hadn't realised this was dependant on the owner, that does make sense. Many Thanks Adam

Hi All, I'm a bit baffled as to why our new team's request list is still showing blue even after colleagues have gone in and checked the lasted updates on the ticket. I understand the blue highlight is for an update in a ticket you haven't seen so it makes it easier to identify updates in the tickets that you haven't read. However our colleagues in the newly created queue have seen those updates and even after refreshing the request list this is still highlighted. All bar one ticket in the screenshot attached which was past over from another team remains blue. Do I need to apply something in order for this functionality to work at a queue level, and I've missed it? Screen shot attached. Thanks in advance. Adam

Thanks @Ehsan Things seem to be much better for us. I do note that people will need to assign owners again for tickets that were impacted by this issue.

I don't know if this is a help but all of the impacted tickets for us at least and would seem to be the case for @Adrian Simpkins this is occurring on tickets created today. I'm not seeing the issue on tickets created before today.

Hi @Ehsan, I can confirm I've tried both I.E and Edge Chromium, same issues occur. I can also confirm we're getting these reports across multiple machines from our Service Desk. So if it was a cache related issue I would of thought this would machine specific. I'm being pinged constantly by our support teams here but this is the latest information that I have at the moment. I'll Private message you a support code an a reference as an example

I have this issue in private browser and trying a different browser @Ehsan. I can confirm for us at least owners appear to be assigned when no owner has been selected. I have raised a support ticket for this issue. We didn't appear to be impacted at the same time as other but we are getting a flurry of reports since 12:45pm

Plus 1 this now an issue for us.

Thanks @Victor, I did look through and studied the wiki page at great detail upon setting this up but I will have a look at those community posts as well. Thanks as always for your help. Kind Regards Adam

@Victor, Thanks for the update Victor, so to summarise what you are saying the routing rule above should work fine because it's not dependant on mailbox. What we are finding is that the updates to a ticket will only work is they are being sent using the IT Support mailbox. Any other mailbox and the routing rule does not work, but as you can screenshot above no mail box is specified in regards to routing rule. Do you have any idea why this might be happening? Many Thanks Adam

Hi All, We've successfully configured a second mailbox into our Hornbill instance to be able to handle updates from our facilities management team when they look to go live with Hornbill. Up until this point we have had just the IT mailbox configured in Hornbill. I need any email updates with a ticket reference number in subject line to auto update the ticket time line. For example: RE: SRxxxxx I've attached how I believe our current rule is working for our IT mailbox. It appears this rule doesn't specify a mailbox. So I've ensured the second mailbox has the same folders in it however this fails to update the ticket and mailboxes. I have confirmed the mailbox is sending and receiving mail from internal and external email addresses. Do I have to be more specific with this rule or create an additional rule with the mailbox configuration and what I want out of it or should the attached rule just work regardless of mailbox? Many Thanks. Adam

As a follow onto this an apologies to hijack this forum thread, but it is related to the above to a large degree. Is there a way of reordering our SSO profiles from the dropdown list? Our main SSO profile is not first alphabetically, and we believe to allow the majority of our users select the correct profile quicker we would like to reorder, at the moment this seems to default to an alphabetical order which isn't the most appropriate for us. Any help would be gratefully appreciated. Many Thanks Adam

Hi Trevor, Thanks for your response. It's not locked out to anyone. Is itwise for me to delete the library and the document in there, create a new one from scratch and see how I get on? I'm not getting this on any other library and as far as I can tell access and permissions are correct. I was largely reaching out in case I was being silly and missed something obvious. Thanks for your response.

Hi All, I've not come across this before and I've not seen any documentation on this. But I have created a library shared with basic users, which contains a SQL report which is scheduled to run on the first of every month. The basic users, and I can see the library and attempt to download the document. But every time we do the document is locked and it's not possible to open. The document is not checked out for editing and and everyone has read and edit permissions in the library. I've tried creating a different blank spreadsheet and a new tag for the scheduled report to go into. I'm clearly missing something but not sure what. I'm at a loss to what's causing the document to be locked, I can't unlock it, the only way I've been able to get around this, is to download the report manually and send it as an attachment to the users of library via Outlook. Does anyone have any ideas? Many Thanks Adam

Thanks @Ricky for coming back to me, this idea is very much it's early phases of planning, but it's good to know this information up front. Thanks again.

Hello Team, Apologies if this question has occurred before, but we have multiple AD domains, and it looks like there may be need to expand our Hornbill ITOM AD automation capabilities to multiple domains. Is it possible assuming firewall access etc is configured to allow this to happen, to have one Hornbill ITOM Server integrating with multiple domains? Or do we need to have an ITOM server per domain? We'd need to be run AD automations in these domains. Many Thanks Adam

Thanks @Daniel Dekel, That's great. I'll take a look at that page I wasn't sure if the description field was WiKi - mark-up capable in the bulletins section. Thanks for your help with this. Kind Regards Adam

Hi all, Apologies, if this question has been asked before, but I was unable to find an answer for this question. In order to so we can capture customer feedback, we are looking to have a pinned bulletin post, on how our customers are finding the use of the employee portal and what we can do as a department to improve the search items etc for our customers. I'd like to include a link to the catalogue item where they will be submitting their feedback. I also want to include a link to our intranet article where we explain our reasoning behind capturing this feedback and why we want our users to engage with us on this matter. I've seen there is the employee portal link, which I presume will allow us to link to a catalogue item, but being fairly new to the use of the bulletins. I'm trying to work out if this would fulfil our needs. Is this easy for our wide ranging customer base to access? Also keen to reach out to other forum members to see if they have had success doing something similar? Many Thanks Adam

Hi @SamS, In addition to the above post, we'd like to request this as a feature request where the roles can be removed from Active users. This is more important for us. But it would also be nice to have the ability to do this on archived users, but active users are the bigger concern. Many Thanks.

Thanks @SamS for your response and the information provided. We would like to pursue this as a feature request, which removes all roles from archived users. Many Thanks Adam

Hello all, Does anyone have ideas, re the post above? Many Thanks Adam