Hardware status and Substatus OR Install status on CI-classes with Hardware devices

[Ed Laar]

Hi,

I am facing a possible issue in the use of Hardware status and Substatus versus Install status. Following the documentation Hardware status and Substatus should be used on CI-classes that contain hardware CI's while Install status should be used in classes containing non-hardware CI's. So far perfectly fine.

But: On several CI-classes this is OOB not the case.

Example: On cmdb_ci_display_hardware, Hardware status and Substatus are not available, even so on cmdb_ci_ip_phone.

What is the best way to do in these cases? Add Hardware status and Substatus (but they will be added as customized fields) or leave it as-is (but this is causing confusions)

Any suggestions? What do you do in such cases?

Grtz,

Ed

[VivekSattanatha]

It's recommended to disregard the current status fields and instead transition to using the new life cycle status defined in the CSDM (Configuration and Service Data Model). This approach will ensure that the status tracking aligns with the latest industry standards and best practices. It's important to migrate to the new status field as soon as possible to avoid any confusion and maintain consistency across your organization's systems and processes.

https://docs.servicenow.com/bundle/rome-servicenow-platform/page/product/csdm-implementation/concept...

[CMDB Whisperer]

@VivekSattanatha I disagree with this assessment.  The most recent guidance on adopting CSDM Life Cycles is at best "there is no rush to adopt this."  From a practitioner perspective, I can tell you that you simply cannot disregard the current status fields in favor of CSDM Life Cycles.  Your world will break.  The platform is still not ready for this, especially in the Asset/CI space.  However, you can consider adopting CSDM Life Cycles as a one-way synchronization from the legacy fields using the Life Cycle Mappings, and you should ensure that no one has the ability to update these fields directly on assets or CIs.  Use only the legacy fields for updating the status of assets and CIs.

[Michelle9]

Was reading through your input and wondering if you still think CDSM Life Cycle is not ready for prime time. I ask because we have tried to migrate and are running into multiple issues that are inherent to the platform. Thoughts in 2025?

[Jeremy Perdue]

Agreed. @CMDB Whisperer, do you have thoughts in 2025? You have posted some really good guidance while I have been looking into this. Would love to hear your thoughts today.