ARQ: Default Role Provisioning Problem in Access Request???

Question

Hi,
This Business Scenario is very common to have default role(s) assigned to a User at the back end system. So I have the same requirement. In achieving this, I followed below thread here:
MSMP Issue - GRC 10
I have also followed the note#1616092  for configuring the Default Roles.
I have performed below activities:
1. Param#2009 = YES
2. Param#2010 = 001
3. Param#2011 = REQUEST
4. Param#2013 = SYSTEM
5. Param#2038 = YES
6. Imported a test role and NO ROLE OWNER is maintained.
7.In NWBC->-AM->RM, I maintained a test role as a default.
Now when I raise a request, application is successfully adding the default role to the request. However, the problem I am facing is that, one Manager approves the request, it is getting failed.
The Audit Log says that, the STAGE is "Completed" but I could also see "No Agent Found, Cancelling path XYZ (in stage no. 002- GRAC_ROLEOWNER)
May I know what I am missing here? Why I am getting error and how can I resolve it?
Please advise.
Regards,
Faisal

Answer 1

Hi Faisal,
sorry for late resposne I was away traveling.
default roles are being added by default to access request
Yes, these roles are added to the access request.
FN: OK
and this roles are following your normal paths which I guess assumes manager and role owner.
How such roles (not having role owner) will follow the normal path Manager->Role Owner if we are enabling routing (Rule ID: GRAC_MSMP_ROUTE_NO_ROLEOWNER) at manager stage level? Can you please help me understand this?
FN: OK If you enable routing it will go to routing path. I have understood your post as you put in question the behavior of default roles and my point was - they act exacly the same like regular roles.
- request is going to detour path
Does it answer my question?
FN: My point was default roles like all other will go to detur path (assuming you setup it globaly)
Deafault roles can have separate path (in my case) where only supervisor is approving it.
Instead of "GRAC_MSMP_ROUTE_NO_ROLEOWNER"  I believe we can have our own rule to have a separate path for such default roles based upon business requirement. Correct me, if required.
FN; correct
It was design in way that initiator rule based on role crtivality is sending this rule to separate path without role owner.
Again, I believe you have enabled your custom rule here to achieve your business requirement instead standard rule id.
correct
If you do not have separate path - this role like any other will follow standard path you have.
Here, I had used a stage called "ZNO_STAGE_PATH" for routing the system line item, which does not have any owner. I used the same path ID for "GRAC_MSMP_ROUTE_NO_ROLEOWNER"Rule ID and it is working fine as of now.
FN: good
My question is that, do you think if I don't use "ZNO_STAGE_PATH" as Path ID for "GRAC_MSMP_ROUTE_NO_ROLEOWNER" Rule ID, should it follow the standard Manager->Role Owner path and these default roles get approved and assigned automatically?
FN: You should use the path ZNO_STAGE_PATH as path ID for routing rule.
If the role does not have role owner it will not allow you the even get to Role Onwer stage - request will be detured.
My point from the begining was - instead of using the routing rule - in our case we used separate path for default roles without role owner:) only consisted with manager stage. Again your approach is different but also will work.
Then which Path ID should I use for "GRAC_MSMP_ROUTE_NO_ROLEOWNER" Rule ID, as it is mandatory?
Should I use my current path for New/Change Account where at Manager level this was routed due to non availability of role owner?
Are you asking for default roles?
Please advise.
Regards,
Faisal