Questions around Activating CSDM Lifecycle Standards

[Alec Hanson]

Hi,

I am wondering if anyone has had any actual success in migrating to the new Lifecycle Stage and Stage Status and if you have any advice or guidance.

I thought I would be in a good position to help get this working on a fairly new instance, but am finding a few inconsistencies that I am struggling with so any input would be great:

1. Inconsistency between Process Diagrams and Life Cycle Controls

The CSDM Life Cycle States process diagrams seems fairly straight forward, but then when I try to align these to what is setup in the Life Cycle Control (life_cycle_control) they don't seem to match. for example for Physical / Hardware CIs we have:

Yet in the controls table I see different status values:

Indeed neither Legal Hold or Quarantine are valid in the Controls table. This seems to be similar across the stages.

2. For new Instances, should old status still be used, or new Lifecycle stage/status

An interesting article by David Skowronek (https://community.servicenow.com/community?id=community_article&sys_id=88a3a7b6db708d10e515c22305961...) implied that the Legacy Status should still be updated and just the Lifecycle Stage/Status used as an output for report, scripts etc.

However when I try this within my PDI, any update to the Legacy status ‘install_status’ on a Server makes no update at all to the Lifecycle Stages

3.Life Cycle Mapping for CIs

I see we have different mappings for cmdb_ci_hardware (40 mappings) versus cmdb_ci_server (14).

cmdb_ci_server is a child of cmdb_ci_hardware so I assume that these 14 replace all 40 of those for cmdb_ci_hardware rather than being a combination?

4. Life Cycle Mapping Should these work OOTB

I am aware one of the first steps is to “Adjust and add any mappings as needed for your environment.” .

I understand this is required where you have any custom statuses, but is it expected that the OOTB default data is sufficient?

I am finding that the Lifecycle Stage / Status can become very much out of sync across a CI and an Asset with fields no updating as expected, and this seems to defeat the object of this CSDM holistic view.

5.Life Cycle Mapping fields

Priority: Does anyone have any examples of how this works as it is not clear to me

Reverse sync choice​: What does this field do?

Thanks in advance

 

 

[Adi Schmid]

Hello Alec
We face similar challenges. For example, we would like to get the CSDM Life Cycle up and running for the Product Models. As you have already described, the combinations from the documentation make sense. Unfortunately, these are not available in our live environment or in new demo instances.
We opened two Cases for this a few days ago.
Best Regards
Adi

@Marcel Leu already opened a thread on this topic some time ago
difference between CSDM "White Paper Lifecycle Sta... - ServiceNow Community

[Alec Hanson]

Thanks Adi,

At least I am not going crazy and miss seeing things. Would be great if you can let me know any feedback from the Cases.

[Marek Meres]

Hello Alec, Adi,

Have you got clarifications from ServiceNow already? I have played a bit with new Lifecycle fields on my PDI (I first migrated to CSDM lifecycle standard and set up the CSDM) but there seems to be a big mess: the new LC attributes on the CI apparently do not synchronize with the same on the related Asset but the legacy attributes do - leading to situation when LC on Asset change to "To Be Determined" while LC on the CI says something valid... Cannot make much sense out of it.

Btw: the legacy attribute on the Server class forcing sync is not "install_status" but "hardware_status" (and of course "operational_status")

Thanks in advance for sharing some clarifications!

Best regards,

Marek

[Priya143]

Hello -  did you get any answers on question 3 and 5?