Comentarios (3)

1 robbinma ha hecho un comentario el Enlace permanente

thanks for writing this article. <div>&nbsp;</div> Is there a recommended way of handling the situation where multiple people need to be associated to a single phone number? <div>&nbsp;</div> There is a legitimate business case for that e.g. a group of shift workers working in a control room where they could be sharing the same phone number.

2 JeanCR ha hecho un comentario el Enlace permanente

Hi robbinma. <div>&nbsp;</div> Thank you for your feedback! <div>&nbsp;</div> I did some research and what I learned is that the requirement for phone numbers being unique derived from the development of the Email Listener. The Email Listener receives messages and creates Maximo transactions and there is a need to authenticate those transactions. This is done by using the inbound phone number to access a Person record and then the associated User record to obtain the Security Group of the originator of the inbound email request. Therefore, there must be an unambiguous path from the Phone Number to the Person. <div>&nbsp;</div> I couldn't find a recommendation for your situation. What was told to me is that the phone number is a surrogate for the User. Therefore, this would be similar to a group of users sharing a user id, which violates the license of Maximo. Each person that is submitting a request to Maximo is a user and needs a separate User ID.

3 BrianBaird ha hecho un comentario el Enlace permanente

Jean, this doesn't make any sense to me at all. I've never needed to pass a phone number in the email object. In fact, I'm not sure how I could get one. <div>&nbsp;</div> The only dd relationships between person and phone are: <div>&nbsp;</div> name parent child whereclause <br /> PHONE PERSON PHONE personid=:personid <br /> PRIMARYPHONE PERSON PHONE personid=:personid and isprimary=:yes <div>&nbsp;</div> I end up having to have no phone numbers as contact points for crews that share resources (phone #). <div>&nbsp;</div> I don't know if you can help with this, but.. <div>&nbsp;</div> Thanks, Brian