IBM System Storage Ideas Portal
This portal is to open public enhancement requests against IBM System Storage products. To view all of your ideas submitted to IBM, create and manage groups of Ideas, or create an idea explicitly set to be either visible by all (public) or visible only to you and IBM (private), use the IBM Unified Ideas Portal (https://ideas.ibm.com).
Shape the future of IBM!
We invite you to shape the future of IBM, including product roadmaps, by submitting ideas that matter to you the most. Here's how it works:
Search existing ideas
Start by searching and reviewing ideas and requests to enhance a product or service. Take a look at ideas others have posted, and add a comment, vote, or subscribe to updates on them if they matter to you. If you can't find what you are looking for,
Post your ideas
Post an idea.
Get feedback from the IBM team and other customers to refine your idea.
Follow the idea through the IBM Ideas process.
Specific links you will want to bookmark for future use
Welcome to the IBM Ideas Portal (https://www.ibm.com/ideas) - Use this site to find out additional information and details about the IBM Ideas process and statuses.
IBM Unified Ideas Portal (https://ideas.ibm.com) - Use this site to view all of your ideas, create new ideas for any IBM product, or search for ideas across all of IBM.
ideasibm@us.ibm.com - Use this email to suggest enhancements to the Ideas process or request help from IBM for submitting your Ideas.
Thanks for the response, Sandeep. I'll reopen to put it as an uncommited candidate. There is already an RFE to be able to enable/disable dual control for specific actions (http://www.ibm.com/developerworks/rfe/execute?use_case=viewRfe&CR_ID=138176) though no one has been able to clearly define what "actions". This seems slightly different because you want it at the session level. However, I'm still not sure I'm understanding how the new automation user wouldn't work in the use case you provided. When adding a copy set to that config it can be automated using the automation user so that Dual Control is bypassed. Course that automation user would have the ability to do the same for other sessions on the server as well. Is that the concern? Perhaps getting the account team to setup a call might be best so we can discuss further. Thanks.
Thanks, but lets consider one of our CSM session setup for a prod environment. We have a production and a test site with SGC... so, to manage this, we have 3 CSM sessions. 1 for Prod to SGC Source, 1 for SGC backups, 1 for SGC source to Test site ... and now to add copysets to this, and validate the sessions, person A will add copysets, B will approve all those requests, person A then issues necessary start commands etc and B will approve that etc.. So, in this case, if there is an option to disable Dual control for selective sessions, it will save a ton... and yes, adding Automation ID will definitely benefit the other issue...
Please see if there are any drawbacks by removing dual control for selective sessions.. Thanks for considering.
In the CSM 6.3.1 release, tentatively planned for 4Q 2021, CSM will be adding a new "automation" user role. This automation user role can be used to define a user that will bypass Dual Control support as automation will not have two users to validate an action. I believe this will meet your request. Please let us know if it doesn't and if this RFE still needs to be considered.
The new automation role is being tracked by RFE 150700
https://www.ibm.com/developerworks/rfe/execute?use_case=viewRfe&CR_ID=150700