- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Mute
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Report Inappropriate Content
‎04-04-2024 10:23 AM
use case:
- managed services customer, they sell ''services'' as product, e.g. sd wan monitoring and installation
- 1 customer order = 1 PO > PS requires RS (Routers)
For quantity requirement, would you:
- enter the quantity at ordering
- 1 order line > 200 product orders > 200 resource orders
OR
- have a CHAR = quantity on the PS and quantity mapping with the RS
- 1 order line > 1 product order > 200 resource orders (quantity mapping)
from a service assurance or day2 operations (MACD), would it make more sens to do it against 1 product inventory/install base item or 200 product inventories?
Solved! Go to Solution.
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Mute
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Report Inappropriate Content
‎04-04-2024 11:45 PM
@Joshua Chen FX Based on your description, you are selling a Managed Service Offering that entitles the customer to have an 'n' number of Routers.
In this use case, it may be more appropriate to drive the 'n' quantity via characteristics rather than setting it against the Order Line Item.
The option of "200 product orders > 200 resource orders", seems unsuitable (although not invalid) because the product being sold is Managed Service and not the Router. The Router appears to be an entitlement.
As an example, are you selling 200 iPhones or a Corporate Mobility plan that entitles customer to 200 iPhones that you manage?
For MACD scenarios - do you have use cases of changing a particular Router inventory record of the 200 that would be created? This can be done using TMF652 - Resource Order Management, although not supported OOTB.
For Assurance use cases, each of the Router inventory record (corresponding to the RS) can be mapped against a CMDB CI record against which Incidents, Change Requests can be tracked and managed.
An alternative, as a food for thought, is not to define a Resource Spec in the P-S-R Catalog and instead create them directly in the CMDB CI. You need to consider what do you gain or lose by maintaining the Router record in the Inventory tables as well as in CMDB.
Look forward to your view!
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Mute
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Report Inappropriate Content
‎09-10-2024 09:10 PM
I had just the same problem.
If I use the 'order stage' field of product order, as in the solution you presented, do I need to write a subflow that automatically closes the lower level domain order?
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Mute
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Report Inappropriate Content
‎09-11-2024 06:20 AM
Hi @Satoshi Abe ,
Just to make sure we are talking about the same thing.
The original problem statement was about having to deal with repetitive order tasks that could not be manually closed as these could run into hundreds. So, there was a requirement to be able to auto close them once they are all completed.
So I had proposed to set the field 'Order Stage' on the parent Product Order once all Resource Order related activities are completed which can then act as a trigger to close all the Order Tasks for the children domain orders.
This is a very specific solution for a very specific problem, may not be suitable everywhere.
To your question, it is a best practice to close all domain orders bottom up.
So, yes the subflows for the children domain orders should have a step to set it to complete.
If the children domain order subflow does not have specific actions, you could simply build a generic subflow that updates the domain order state to closed complete.
