In v11.1, N-Central added a feature that automatically adds the default "Agent/Probe Status" notification profile to all new Probes. This is excellent... unless you don't use the default notification templates. I would like to have the ability to automatically add non-default notification profiles to a Probe. Preferably this functionality would be implemented through the existing Rules structure, just like any other automatic ...more »
I would like to be able to select a rule in the Device Details -> Monitoring -> Associations view and reapply it. Often there is no easy way to disassociate a device from a rule and reassociate it to get the rule to be reapplied to the device. Service Templates can be reapplied, and Scheduled Task Profiles and Maintenance Windows require browsing to multiple different locations to reapply their settings. Clicking on ...more »
I would love to be able to remove and add SO level rules without having to navigate to the SO level. Example, I am offboarding a client and need to remove some install rules, would like to just check and deleted, but instead have to navigate to SO level, then to the rule, then to grant access then scroll down and uncheck the customer. Kind of a pain
here we are almost a decade later and it's still not possible to set "unschedueld downtime" or "update monitored ip" via rule.
Support have now banned the abilit yot do so via a NAC advanced script and doing it via a manual bulk edit is what we've been trying to avoid.
So let's make rules great again and allow the setting of any device property you can do manually!
Why does the type column exist on the Rules list if all of the objects in the list are of the same type? Why is it so large? Why is Type column gigantic for just an icon, while Description is truncated? (same applies for the Access column which has fixed values of "Private" or "Public") Why is it just an icon requiring me to mouse over to see the text? Why does everything about this column tell me something that is ...more »
Currently, rules can only target devices inclusively based on one or more filters, targeting all devices included in them. It'd be helpful to have the ability to *exclude* devices based on filters also. For instance, I want to create update schedules that ensure Domain Controllers don't get rebooted alongside everything else. Currently that means setting up a separate filter that includes class "Servers - Windows" except ...more »
It would be really nice if the Rules page had a column similar to All Devices / Active Issues whose icons would light based on which tabs had active settings. For example: Funnel : Devices to Target Computer : Network Device Configuration Options Smartphone : Mobile Device Configuration Options Meshed Gears : Scheduled Task Profiles Magnifying Glass : Monitoring Options Calendar : Maintenance Windows People : Grant Customers ...more »
it would be extremely handy to be able to, at the very least, export the selected customers from the rules grant customer/site access tab, at the very most, have a report that will show me the associations between customers and rules, allowing me to pick which customers, or which rules I want to run the report against. In particular I need this for all of my patch management rules as we currently have to audit patch ...more »
I want to be able to see what Rules, etc are dependent upon a given filter, template, etc.
ie, if I delete a filter, I see a prompt that I shouldn't do that if there are associated rules, but there's no way short of examining *every rule* to know what the associations are.
Devices are allowed to import into N-Central but components like Patch or AVD may not be enabled if they exceed the number of licenses.
We shouldn't prevent the device from importing, but a warning of some kind should be displayed.
When we reply to an assigned ticket or start a timer on a ticket the status should change from Assigned to In-Progress. Likewise when we set the ticket on hold or pending customer reply and the customer replies it should be taken to a pending technician review status or something similar. We are still missing important messages since the system continues to e-mail us for the changes we put into the system, if we made ...more »
Custom fields at the Customer and Site levels that are accessible via the rules would provide a lot of flexibility when it comes to service templates or notifications. For example: If I want to roll out Security Manager to a customer, but I need to do it on a site by site basis, it would be very easy to have a custom field that indicates that a site should have Security Manager. Then I can create a filter and eventually ...more »