"Stephen Hochstetler" <shochste@us.ibm.com> writes:
> Todd,
>
> You mentioned that you are taking NV events, forwarding those to TEC...then
> getting automatic tickets. The problem with long names is the space
> taken in the one line problem descriptions.
>
> NV --> TEC is a built-in adapter
> TEC --> ticket is probably a script called by a TEC ruleset
>
> Why not just update that script to remove the domain name from the right
> slot value before it forwards the information to the ticketing system?
> This leaves NV alone and adds no workload to TEC.
This does sound like the best solution...now to sell it to the TEC
guys. :-) As in many larger environments, a different group handles
TEC rules and ticketing. Their requirement for NV events currently
requests a hostname only be sent, but it seems that doing so has a
variety of drawbacks that undermine the TEC-Netview integration.
Thanks all for the illumination--I think I can sell a change of that
"event standard" or at least open the discussion based on what's been
discussed in this thread.
--
|