On Monday 21 September 2009 12:58:05 pm Justin M. Streiner
wrote:
> I've run into this in the past with different vendors,
> even on occasions when the most frequently needed
> information ("show tech", "request tech-support", etc...)
> is attached to the support case before it gets assigned
> to an engineer. A response like the one that was
> previously posted indicates that the engineer who handled
> the case failed to look at those attachments, wasting
> time and effort on both sides.
Same here; and we've seen this both for Cisco and other
vendors.
We spend the time to post the usual details support
engineers would need when we first submit the case, i.e.:
o software version
o platform type/model
o status before issue
o status during issue
o mitigating actions taken to resolve issue
o current status
o any changes that could be impacting
o how badly the network is affected
o what the impact may mean for business
o e.t.c.
... and then we get back a list of questions asking us the
very things we've submitted. Many times, I've sent back an
e-mail to the support engineers asking them to read my
submission and then come back to me - and it works, although
I'd rather not waste time doing that.
Given how difficult dealing with TAC(s) can be via e-mail,
we've never engaged them on phone, unless when they call us
to run labs, fortunately or otherwise.
It could be a lot better...
Cheers,
Mark.
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
_______________________________________________ cisco-nsp mailing list [email protected] https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/
