-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 110
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Add trust flag to accounts in PDB Deskpro tool to improve automation #1560
Comments
-1 ... let's implement #1185 |
They’re dependencies. I should’ve noted it and will update.
…On Thu, Feb 29, 2024 at 13:02 Arnold Nipper ***@***.***> wrote:
-1 ... let's implement #1185
<#1185>
—
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
<#1560 (comment)>,
or unsubscribe
<https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AFA2YQQF25RJDMZ27POX6NLYV5WM3AVCNFSM6AAAAABD7HOO66VHI2DSMVQWIX3LMV43OSLTON2WKQ3PNVWWK3TUHMYTSNZRGY3TIMBVGM>
.
You are receiving this because you authored the thread.Message ID:
***@***.***>
|
PC call: this should be done through website? |
Whatever is fastest(cheap), most widely accessible and reliable. Sounds like a lookup from our own DB may make more sense. |
We are going down the wrong road, IMO. We already put in trust in Admin Committee Guidelines and Criteria for Approving Networks, IXPs, and Facilities |
No flag means no automation. I’m certain thats not the state we want going
forward. If we have clear requirements like “created facility before” we
need to enable automation, not subjectivity. This also has nothing to do
with AC. Its better product.
Seems like the right road to me.
…On Thu, Mar 14, 2024 at 17:09 Arnold Nipper ***@***.***> wrote:
We are going down the wrong road, IMO. We already put in trust in Admin
Committee Guidelines and Criteria for Approving Networks, IXPs, and
Facilities
<https://docs.peeringdb.com/committee/admin/approval-guidelines>
—
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
<#1560 (comment)>,
or unsubscribe
<https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AFA2YQTGMHFRMWFIYGEZNW3YYIGXVAVCNFSM6AAAAABD7HOO66VHI2DSMVQWIX3LMV43OSLTON2WKQ3PNVWWK3TUHMYTSOJYGQ4DOMJVGY>
.
You are receiving this because you authored the thread.Message ID:
***@***.***>
|
Again, this has nothing to do with DeskPRO. We have all information in our DB. Mission completed |
We’ll agree to dis-agree.
Thanks Arnold!
…-M<
On Fri, Mar 15, 2024 at 17:12 Arnold Nipper ***@***.***> wrote:
Again, this has nothing to do with DeskPRO. We have all information in our
DB. Mission completed
—
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
<#1560 (comment)>,
or unsubscribe
<https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AFA2YQROYGGL4IHZSTWVFHTYYNP2PAVCNFSM6AAAAABD7HOO66VHI2DSMVQWIX3LMV43OSLTON2WKQ3PNVWWK3TUHMZDAMBQGQ2DKNJWGU>
.
You are receiving this because you authored the thread.Message ID:
***@***.***>
|
Closing, will circle back at some point |
Is your feature request related to a problem? Please describe.
Add a trust flag in deskpro so we can use it to automate inbound object creations.
Who is affected by the problem?
PDB Admins
What is the impact?
Lower workload, improve efficiency
Are there security concerns?
No, to the contrary. Likely to improve security
Are there privacy concerns?
No, user account data is private.
Describe the solution you'd like
Create a field in deskpro where a user can be assigned a trust flag if warranted. Such as successfully created a fac object previously AND has continued to maintain trust in the peeringdb community with good data.
Do you think this feature will require a formal design?
Yes. Not certain if this is a 20C opportunity or something separate with DeskPro
Describe alternatives you've considered
StatusQuo. Seems terrible.
Could this feature request need support from the Admin Committee?
Yes
What is the proposed priority?
Urgent
Provide a rationale for any/all of the above
A trust flag is likely to automated more process to successful closure and sort out the bad for human intervention. Hopefully results in reduction of AC ticket load. There's also an opex benefit reducing workload across the AC and especially when size or efficiency slides up and down for various understandable reasons.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: