The other question to ask: Is the protocol even available on Unix? -----Original Message----- From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Carey Matthew Black Sent: Wednesday, January 30, 2008 12:35 PM To: [email protected] Subject: Re: Incoming emails on Solaris + Exchange
Ray, I am not challenging or questioning any of those ideas or perspectives. (Mostly because I think you are right on the mark.) However... Can you indicate any preferred protocols that should be supported by BMC for E-Mail with ARS? Have you already submitted RFE (Request for Enhancements) for support of those protocols? ( Just trying to light a candle, not a religious war over platforms/standards/security. :) ) -- Carey Matthew Black Remedy Skilled Professional (RSP) ARS = Action Request System(Remedy) Love, then teach Solution = People + Process + Tools Fast, Accurate, Cheap.... Pick two. On Jan 30, 2008 1:22 PM, Ray Gellenbeck <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > ** > > Folks, remember that a big sector of Remedy useage is Uncle Sam, both > govt and military. > > I can only speak for our project in that both POP3 and IMAP4 are > forbidden by security. This makes like really rough for someone > operating on Solaris as MBOX becomes your only protocol left for > incoming email (MAPI is Exchange/Winblows). > > (begin soapbox) > This is a heartache we have with Remedy as we re-evaluate ITSM > platform selection in the future. BMC's attitude is increasingly > "just get a windows box" for more and more of their solutions or > sub-features with ARS. We're getting tired of hearing "oh, we haven't > developed a unix version of SSO for 6.03" in the past or "just use MAPI or POP3" now for incoming email. > > Remedy started out primarily a Unix system and much of their growth > was due to that sector. Government, at least a big majority of it, > runs on Unix/Oracle. The younger generation of devs may not see > things that way and I have no desire to fire a debate thread here, but > spend some time in the military sector and then evaluate that > statement. If BMC doesn't wake up and smell the coffee as they roll > out products, they could start finding their wallet getting lighter, > IMHO. Slapping Windows-box bandaids in a secure Unix environment is > not a realistic workaround just because BMC doesn't have the > committment to ensuring that their product works as-advertised on all > environments they claim to support when they sell it and collect their multi-million-dollar support contracts each year. > (end soapbox) _______________________________________________________________________________ UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives at www.arslist.org Platinum Sponsor: www.rmsportal.com ARSlist: "Where the Answers Are"
