RIchard Horton

Thanks Gerry and Dan A question on how this works. Where you use Single Sign On for most users and Direct for some (e.g. Admin), if you choose the Mandatory option for 2FA does it only enforce it for Direct access ? I'm assuming this is likely to be the case as the SSO will (or should) cater for this separately. Before I turn it on, could you confirm whether our SSO use won't be impacted. Richard PS if not there already a wiki article on 2FA would be good (that gets found if you search for MFA !)

@James AinsworthI thought I had seen how to do a voting button on email template and picking up response in workflow, but a quick search hasn't found it. Can you point me to the right place ? Also, can you offer any wisdom on the notifications question ? May become redundant if I get the voting buttons working but useful to be more aware how this works.

OK, we'll give it a go then !

Thanks James. I agree on your comments on reopened tickets in general. I like your approach that you outline with the email yes/no but I think it relies on people having an account for the ticket link to work ? Most customers for our tickets are external and only set up as Contacts and don't log in at all to the customer portal (many of them will only have one ticket in a year). My understanding is that the Yes/No voting won't work for them. Am I right ? Suspend, along with Wait for Status Change is what we are doing at the moment. But this relies on someone manually changing the status, which relies on them needing to know that a reply has been received. See above ! You are correct that if the ticket is reopened then it is more relevant to be emailing the team than the individual. Actually for us at the moment, given that we haven't managed to automate re-opening, the challenge is doing that for the reply notification, so that someone knows to reopen the ticket. What happens now is that there is a "Request SR00038877 has been updated via email" email generated by the system from a no-reply email, but this only goes to the person who resolved the ticket rather than to the whole team. As you say, the whole team would be more relevant. It would also be helpful to know which notification setting triggers this email as we have someone who isn't getting it and says they have turned notifications on. If you have thoughts on how we can improve this, that would be appreciated

Those are interesting ideas, I'll have to look at those

Thanks Keith. I'm not seeing the first menu. This is what I see Maybe there's another role level I haven't turned on ? Richard

That worked thank you. The Move to Folder option also works. However even if I've selected multiple messages it only seems to select the first one. And there doesn't seem to be a select all option. Is there a quicker way than moving one at a time (maybe another setting I've not done)

That makes sense, thank you, Steve. I'll look into that

That's the sort of thing I was expecting. @Victor. I don't have this, even when I log in as Admin. This is what I get

This feels basic but I'm not seeing how to do it. I want to create a folder to sit alongside Inbox Sent Drafts etc in an existing Mailbox. This is as I want to clear out the Inbox but not delete everything that's in it. It's been done before (I can see a folder we have created though that was for auto-routing rather than lift-and-shift) but I'm not seeing options in the mailbox for doing this. Thanks Richard

PS this is before a ticket is closed that I am talking about

I think that the default behaviour in SM is that after a ticket is Resolved, if a reply from the customer is then received the following happens : the ticket is updated, the last updated field changes from the analyst who resolved it to System and it goes to the top of the request list, the idea being that if you are managing the queue this would highlight to you the need for action. Automatic reopening has been requested by one team. I get that there is a downside to this (if someone replies to say thank you then the ticket is reopened) but it's clearer that it needs action. I've seen a workaround suggesting a sub-status for a pending resolution but that sounds as though it's forcing the concept of resolution. Assuming that I'm right, that it is not straightforward to set HSM to do this, then the workaround seems to be making it clear to analysts that there is something they need to attend to. Any notifications issued seem to me to go to the person who resolved the ticket but what is to say they aren't now on holiday ? So, can we set HSM/the workflow so that notifications of emailed updates to resolved tickets go to the team responsible, not the individual ? And what notification setting ensures that such updates are notified in the first place, even if only to the person who resolved the ticket. The team in question want to work with open tickets ignoring resolved tickets, so need a way of being clear when resolved tickets need attention. I will have another go at talking them through the default behaviour, but are there other options I can add in line with my suggestions ?

This got stalled but we'll be returning to it. @Victorcan I check something. When we had our original implementation I remember being asked if we wanted to be able to assign tickets between teams. At the time that wasn't wanted as all the areas were discrete and we said that we didn't. Is there a more basic setting that allows teams to transfer tickets to another team or if we had said "yes" would something like this have been implemented for us ?

Thanks Steve. It's the first scenario. The form input needs some processing to determine the customer. I think I have found a way to deal with this combining your comment above with my looping idea. What I have done is a decision node that loops back if the custom field is not set. Within the loop it does a write to the timeline and then a get request. I have tested it and it only goes round the loop twice - the activity in the first loop is sufficient to allow the custom fields to have been set.

Thanks, Martyn

PS I see that your Cyber Essentials certification is due to be renewed next week, so hopefully this is a timely question !

You have a helpful page describing how Hornbill complies with Cyber Essentials. However Cyber Essentials has been updated since the page was last updated. So, request 1 is, can you update this, please. A couple of specifics Multi Factor Authentication should now be available to turn on. Is this available for users of Direct Login (for SSO it is provided by the SSO provider) ? I can't see anything on it in the wiki. There are minimum password rules specified in Cyber Essentials. Where in Admin do you set these (I remember that these were set as part of our implementation, but don't see anything on where you can check/change these)

Thanks Steve. Unfortunately information we are picking up from the 2nd call is key to the next steps we want to perform. As you say, what we're wanting to do is simply instigate a short pause to allow the 2nd call to complete (I've now understood that the 2nd call is necessary because custom fields are in a separate table so you need the first call to complete to give you the relevant linkage to update them). You are right that in theory no one is working so why does it matter. However we don't work in an "everyone clocks off at 5" environment and it is frustrating if you are working beyond the standard service day defined in the WTC not to be able to work on requests that you know have come through.

The way of doing this that I think we may have to adopt (unless someone can suggest something better) is to set up a decision loop that keeps interogating the request until the custom variable set in the 2nd call has been populated.

How does that work, Steve ? To do that I think I would need the script to do everything in one call. The original script was provided by Hornbill so I assume there's a reason it does it in two calls rather than one.

I have a business process workflow where we have put a suspend of 1 minute at the start. This is because the ticket is created by an API call from a script, and there are 2 calls in the script (the 2nd updates custom variables within the ticket), so we want to give it time for both to execute. The problem is that the suspend seems to wait according to the working time calendar. So, if I submit a request at 1730 it doesn't release the suspend until 09:01, which I think is because of how the WTC is set up. While we do not expect our staff to work 24x7 we do expect that Hornbill will create tickets when they are raised, so want the suspend to be for 1 minute not 1 minute within service hours. Make sense ? Is there a way to do this ? Setting up a loop until a mandatory custom field has a value is the best I can think of.

Any thoughts on this one ? Thanks Richard

Thanks Gerry. Sorry, I was away last week. What I want is to be able to extract the watermark from the email and put it into a custom variable. The point in the workflow when this happens is not completely arbitrary - it comes in response to a task so I could set the workflow to wait until the custom field is populated ? To re-state that 1/ When a task in the workflow is completed an email is sent 2/ When the reply comes to that email (which will be using a standard format) I want to extract the watermark and put it into a custom field 3/ Only then do I want to proceed. I am currently doing this by inserting a task to manually input the watermark when it is received. I would like to automate this Is that clearer now ? Richard

The numbers change. The letters and : stay the same. It's the number that I want

This is for a (very small) team of analysts, so it is any ticket that has come into their queue. We don't reassign between queues so it's a straightforward question to identify the tickets (all non cancelled ones) As for what they really want ... always the challenge to work that one out, isn't it ! My take on it from what I've been told is that they are interested in two things, what I think of as request head information (the customer, category, description, status, when raised and resolved, that sort of thing) and the timeline (specifically emails that have been received and sent). I get that this is not what you expect people to do in normal operation, but wanting an extract as part of an exit strategy seems a standard sort of thing ? As mentioned in my question you do have a feature that gives then (print a ticket into a PDF). I reckon that if I could get 1 such PDF per ticket that would suffice - it would allow them to stick them all in a folder and search for key words which is the sort of thing they do. It wouldn't give them a spreadsheet view, but they could separately have a bare bones spreadsheet if they wanted. Does that make sense ? Apologies for the delay getting back to you, Gerry. Despite that I am interested in finding a solution I can apply now. Other areas are happy by the way, but it would on a more general level be reassuring to know there is such a route available. Previously when I've moved from one SM system to another it's not been a problem to get such a download. Maybe you also get questions about porting data into other systems. I'm not asking about that, just about something that can be cross-referenced until the ticket history is no longer of value.