F5 case creation tweaks

Problem this snippet solves:

Makes creating cases in the F5 portal a bit less of an head ache. This script uses Tampermonkey and BigIP-report as a data source to tailor make the case creation process according to your environment.

Features

Only show the modules you actually have activated:

Only show the installed versions

You can still see all of them if you need to

Select your loadbalancers from a dynamically populated drop-down menu

Other smaller things

  • Configure default case severity
  • Configure default choice for "Was this working before?"
  • Configure default chose for "Is the problem related to a virtual server?"
  • Configure a default peferred method of contact
  • Configure a default time zone

How to use this snippet:

Instructions on how to use is available here

https://loadbalancing.se/2018/02/11/f5-case-creation-tweaks/#How_to_use

Code :

85493
Published Feb 11, 2018
Version 1.0

Was this article helpful?

10 Comments

  • Thanks Jason!

     

    New version. Added feature: Now the script can handle if BigIPReport has failed to index individual devices.

     

  • You might be able to if you have a copy of the json file generated by BigIPReport. If you don't I might be able to make an update that supports a simple js object.

     

    /Patrik

     

  • Hi Patrick,

     

    I'm having trouble getting this to work. I copied and pasted Casecreation.js file into Tampermonkey and I can see it saved. When I do look at the script, this red X shows up for line 293.

     

    for(var n in deviceNames)

     

    The error says that 'n' is already defined. Could that be causing my issue?

     

  • Yes, I configured it. My bigipReprtURL is there. What should the value be for @connect? I have linuxworker.j.local. Should that be something else?

     

  • Yeah, you should have the same DNS as your bigipreport. Instructions updated again, sorry for being unclear and thanks for feedback.

     

    /Patrik

     

  • Thanks Patrick. I'll have to play around with it a little bit in a DEV area. We have an APM policy in front of the report so the authentication piece might be an issue.