One-time Cc silently refuses to send mail to RT account names

Greetings,

We are using RT-3.8.4 to handle help requests from users who have
accounts on our network.

The RT account names for our users match their system account names in
order to allow them to authenticate to RT using their system passwords
(via pwauth and PAM). Thus, system user ‘smith’ has an RT account ‘smith’.

If an operator adds ‘smith’ to the One-time Cc field of a Reply or
Comment and updates the ticket, no message is sent to ‘smith’. However,
if the operator adds Smith’s fully-qualified email address to the
One-time Cc field (e.g., smith@example.com), a message is sent.

I’m not sure if this is a bug or a feature, but the silent failure to
send the message surprised at least one of our operators and led to a
miscommunication.

Is there a reason why RT account names are not accepted as values for
this field?
Gary Hall
Network Support Group
Faculty of Applied Sciences
Simon Fraser University

Gary,

It sounds like there is no notification scrip for “Others”. When adding
a “Cc” on a replay, etc. it is NOT considered a “Cc” by RT Notification
scrips, it is considered an “Other”. You may need a new scrip that
"Notify Others" on “whatever” action. Hope this helps.

Kenn
LBNLOn 8/19/2009 4:05 PM, Gary Hall wrote:

Greetings,

We are using RT-3.8.4 to handle help requests from users who have
accounts on our network.

The RT account names for our users match their system account names in
order to allow them to authenticate to RT using their system passwords
(via pwauth and PAM). Thus, system user ‘smith’ has an RT account ‘smith’.

If an operator adds ‘smith’ to the One-time Cc field of a Reply or
Comment and updates the ticket, no message is sent to ‘smith’. However,
if the operator adds Smith’s fully-qualified email address to the
One-time Cc field (e.g., smith@example.com), a message is sent.

I’m not sure if this is a bug or a feature, but the silent failure to
send the message surprised at least one of our operators and led to a
miscommunication.

Is there a reason why RT account names are not accepted as values for
this field?

Gary Hall
Network Support Group
Faculty of Applied Sciences
Simon Fraser University


http://lists.bestpractical.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/rt-users

Community help: http://wiki.bestpractical.com
Commercial support: sales@bestpractical.com

Discover RT’s hidden secrets with RT Essentials from O’Reilly Media.
Buy a copy at http://rtbook.bestpractical.com

Greetings,

We are using RT-3.8.4 to handle help requests from users who have
accounts on our network.

The RT account names for our users match their system account names in
order to allow them to authenticate to RT using their system passwords
(via pwauth and PAM). Thus, system user ‘smith’ has an RT account ‘smith’.

If an operator adds ‘smith’ to the One-time Cc field of a Reply or
Comment and updates the ticket, no message is sent to ‘smith’. However,
if the operator adds Smith’s fully-qualified email address to the
One-time Cc field (e.g., smith@example.com), a message is sent.

Because those inputs are based on entering an email address. If an email of
"smith" is supplied, it is not a valid email address. You may want to take
a peek at RTx::EmailCompletion on cpan.

I’m not sure if this is a bug or a feature, but the silent failure to
send the message surprised at least one of our operators and led to a
miscommunication.

Is there a reason why RT account names are not accepted as values for
this field?

Gary Hall
Network Support Group
Faculty of Applied Sciences
Simon Fraser University


http://lists.bestpractical.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/rt-users

Community help: http://wiki.bestpractical.com
Commercial support: sales@bestpractical.com

Discover RT’s hidden secrets with RT Essentials from O’Reilly Media.
Buy a copy at http://rtbook.bestpractical.com

Drew Barnes
Applications Analyst
Network Resources Dept.
Raymond Walters College