Mail settings regarding 'Disable new request creation through email' and 'Parsing'
Hi Expert,
I have the questions about the following statement "Request threads with subject containing the RequestId and no operational string (UpdateRequest) will be updated as a normal conversation and a new request will not be created.", which is digested from <email-configurations in adminguide>.
Question 1: Does it work only when Enable E-mail Command is activated?
Question 2: Could EACH email with the subject containing the specific RequestID be updated as the conversation into the corresponding request (without creating a new reqeust), EVEN a whole new email (with the Request ID) or the email which has been replied and forwarded several times but the RequestID still being contained in the email subject?
I asked these questions because the above statement could not explain my testing results. You may refer to the details of testing as below.
Our SDP version: 9.1 (Build 9118)
DB: PostgresSQL
My Mail Server Settings are:
1. Disable new request creation through email (in the tab of 'Incoming');
2. Enable E-mail Command (in the tab of 'E-Mail Command');
3. E-mail Address of 'Incoming' & 'Outgoing' is, ie abc@test.com;
4. No operation string is defined in the mail template of ' Replying to a Request'.
The steps of my testings are:
1. User A created a incident request, which is assigned to Technician B;
2. Tech B replied User A through SDP and User A got an email from abc@test.com;
3. User A replied the email to abc@test.com (and cc User C, and Tech B's personal email) in the MS Outlook, and the replied email was updated into the request as Conversation;
4. User C replied the email in the MS Outlook, the email was NOT updated as the conversation BUT a NEW request was created?! (Be noted with the 1st point in my Mail Server Settings).
5. Tech B replied the email in the MS Outlook and got the same results as User C did in the step 4.
In fact, I expected the emails in the step 4 & 5 could be updated into the request as conversation, too.
Please help me to understand the statement I'm confused with, and guide me to achieve what I expected.
Thanks
Oliver
I have the questions about the following statement "Request threads with subject containing the RequestId and no operational string (UpdateRequest) will be updated as a normal conversation and a new request will not be created.", which is digested from <email-configurations in adminguide>.
Question 1: Does it work only when Enable E-mail Command is activated?
Question 2: Could EACH email with the subject containing the specific RequestID be updated as the conversation into the corresponding request (without creating a new reqeust), EVEN a whole new email (with the Request ID) or the email which has been replied and forwarded several times but the RequestID still being contained in the email subject?
I asked these questions because the above statement could not explain my testing results. You may refer to the details of testing as below.
Our SDP version: 9.1 (Build 9118)
DB: PostgresSQL
My Mail Server Settings are:
1. Disable new request creation through email (in the tab of 'Incoming');
2. Enable E-mail Command (in the tab of 'E-Mail Command');
3. E-mail Address of 'Incoming' & 'Outgoing' is, ie abc@test.com;
4. No operation string is defined in the mail template of ' Replying to a Request'.
The steps of my testings are:
1. User A created a incident request, which is assigned to Technician B;
2. Tech B replied User A through SDP and User A got an email from abc@test.com;
3. User A replied the email to abc@test.com (and cc User C, and Tech B's personal email) in the MS Outlook, and the replied email was updated into the request as Conversation;
4. User C replied the email in the MS Outlook, the email was NOT updated as the conversation BUT a NEW request was created?! (Be noted with the 1st point in my Mail Server Settings).
5. Tech B replied the email in the MS Outlook and got the same results as User C did in the step 4.
In fact, I expected the emails in the step 4 & 5 could be updated into the request as conversation, too.
Please help me to understand the statement I'm confused with, and guide me to achieve what I expected.
Thanks
Oliver