Approval of order

Similar Questions

• Adobe did not approve my order?

  I have just orderd Ligthroom 3. Got mail yestoday comfirm, but today I got this email:

  Dear Jan Petersen,

  Unfortunately, we were able to approve your order in the Adobe store.

  If you have any questions, please contact our Customer Service:

  I'm trying to find an e-mail address for support, but I can't seem to find phonenumbers.

  Is there a support email?

  What should do?

  Awating response

  Best regards Jan P

  Hi Jan, you can try our support chat at http://adobe.ly/rSZYR5.

• Publish in approval of order

  Hi all
  
  I am facing a problem in the purchase order approval process. Need suggestion from your end.
  
  Purchase order approval gor failed in the workflow step 'get IN. attributes.
  
  I have found that it is because one of the distribution of the line's quantity ordered by 0.
  
  And the proc (PO_POAPPROVAL_INIT1. GET_PO_ATTRIBUTES) which is connected to 'Get the attributes of PO' ends in error (fracture of mby zero error in the proc)
  
  Workflow fails on node 'get IN. attributes.
  Function called: PO_POAPPROVAL_INIT1. GET_PO_ATTRIBUTES
  
  
  Since the quantity_ordered in a Distribution line is zero, the function is in error (during the attempted division by zero).
  
  Query that fails is
  
  "SELECT SUM (ROUND (POD.nonrecoverable_tax * DECODE (quantity_ordered, NULL, (NVL(POD.amount_ordered,0) - NVL(POD.amount_cancelled,0)) / NVL (POD.amount_ordered, 1), (NVL(POD.quantity_ordered,0) - NVL(POD.quantity_cancelled,0)) / NVL (POD.quantity_ordered, 1)), X_precision))"
  IN l_tax_amount
  OF po_distributions_all POD
  WHERE po_header_id = POHdr_rec.po_header_id; »
  
  
  My question is, how do I solve this problem now (any data possible fix?). As far as I know that I can't change the purchase order now. Kindly give me a work-around for this.
  
  
  Thank you
  Arun

  There is a script generic datafix shipped as a patch. This script will help to deliver the document to incomplete / requires re-registration status. There, after that you can adjust the PO to have correct amounts and approve again.

  The datafix script is $PO_TOP/sql/poxrespo.sql. Please read the documentation and try first in the test instance.

• Purchase order approval via mobile phone

  Hello
  
  Our EBS environment is with version 11.5.10.2 and database 11 GR 2.
  We have a requirement of configuration purchase order approval via Mobile phone / BlackBerry
  
  Could someone send a few docs related to this.
  
  Kind regards
  Mahesh

  Please see these docs/links.

  It is Possible to approve purchase orders, applications Via Blackberry, smartphone or PDA? [338874.1 ID]
  Not be able to approve purchase through Blackberry [ID 444122.1] orders
  BlackBerry displays emails with HTML tags in the body of the email [802225.1 ID]
  Troubleshooting incoming e-mail Notifications [ID 1184846.1]
  Email Notification approvals are rejected [ID 471423.1]
  Buttons missing approval Html, Foward, reject in [395986.1 ID] Email Notification

  With the help of mobile devices with Oracle E-Business Suite
  http://blogs.Oracle.com/stevenChan/entry/mobile_devices_ebs

  Hands on with iPhone Oracle Apps
  http://blogs.Oracle.com/stevenChan/entry/handson_with_oracles_iphone_apps

  Thank you
  Hussein

• Approval of blackBerry Smartphones Blackberry e-mail

  In my company, we use the Microsiga ERP (Proteus) and we can approve purchase orders by e-mail from Outlook. However we cannot aprove this same e-mail of the Blackberry because we receive the message in text format.

  Is it possible to receive this email in HTML format, so that we could approve the purchase order by blackberry?

  TKS in advance

  Hello.

  BIS (Blackberry Internet Service) is given by the carrier (AT & T, T-Mobile, Verizon, Sprint etc)

  Version 2.5 is the latest version.

  The new OS is 4.5.  However, while it is offered by Vodafone in the United Kingdom, it has not been offered, for now, of the above mentioned carriers.  If you go to the Blackberry site, you can download the 4.5 OS, however it is not recommended until your operator offers to match with their BIS.

  The big difference in OS 4.5 is, if I understand correctly, email HTML display and better Media (not Roxio!) programs.

  Having some major issues with Roxio Media.  I suspect 4.5 will take care of the problem.

  Hope this helps

  Writer ~.

• why they approve a download for me

  can anyone help I tried so many times but this software as its impossible, I get the same answer, and there are no problems with payments just

  Unfortunately, we were able to approve your order in the Adobe store.

  If you have any questions, please contact our Customer Service:

  You should do what the message says and contact Customer Service. Tip: use the CHAT to do.

• How to reapprove a request approved?

  My problem is that I've changed an approved purchase order, which requires the re-registration due to the tolerance of price, but the system has sent a message of error that the application related to ALSO requires re-registration. However the requisition cannot be opened because it is approved. It seems to be a vicious circle. What is the solution in this case? Thanks in advance... Szabolcs

  Hello

  Maybe after action plan help you...

  (1) cancel the line of PO in which you this review.
  (2) returns the PR using automatic creation.
  Navigation path: Autocreate > requisition find corresponding in. > tools > request return

  (3) it will take your request to the State of RETURN.
  (4) open PR, make the necessary changes and create the PO again with add to the PO / IN. new option.

  concerning
  Sanjay

• Automatically approve the OPS?

  Hello
  
  ex: we have blanket purchase agreement and now is release, we implemented rule of sourcing and every thing... .i want to make every thing automatically?
  means that I don't want to approve any doc... I want to put as
  (1) when min max, planning the first PO requisition approval aautomatically is it possible, where is implemented?
  (2) once the request is approved, purchase order must approve automatically is it possible? What is put in place?
  
  Thank you

  (1) Yes. Make sure INV: Minmax reorganize approval is set to pre-approved.
  (2) Yes. Do you this through a feature called auto supply. Check http://www.oracleug.com/user-guide/purchasing-overview/setting-automatic-sourcing
  Configure you ASL and ASL attributes, make sure release method was released automatic. See http://download.oracle.com/docs/cd/A60725_05/html/comnls/us/po/autorel.htm for more details.

  Hope that answers your question
  Sandeep Gandhi
  Techno-Functional consultant

• Area 51 - R2, choice of power supply?

  Hello

  I'll buy a new Alienware Area 51 tonight. I decided to put one card video in for now and upgrade/add later.

  On the Alienware website, it says that there 850w for a video card and 1500w for several video cards, but I can't choose to take.

  If I buy a single video card, I can supply 1500w? Or is there a software in the Alienware to change power?

  Thank you for your reply,

  Antoine Bedaton

  DELL-Chris M

  On the siteof USA, I choose food, but you must also choose the correct CPU for the power supply.

  Well well, what do we have here Mr. M? This looks like something for me. Is the way to this Alienware to say than those who choose the Cpu Hotwell & "match" power supply - as if such a thing could even exist within our reality - until later, when the buyer prefers to upgrade to Bwell Cpu, their power will be, what exactly? Not approved?

  A wiki article, operation / well are two processors of tdp of 140 watts. What could be the problem requiring different "options"? Why not make all power supply purchases of "approved"? I see no mention well v. Haswell requirements or revisions on Corsair ax1500i EVGA 1600 (or) Newegg or online, while D850EF-00, D1500EF-HU850EF-00-00 the site of 80Plus PlugLoadSoltions say 850/1500 have no change since their certifications 2 years ago. The search term ' Broadwell-E approved (or certified) power ' doesn't produce any meaningful information to the public, certainly from Intel. Facing no new Broadwell-E approved power supplies released at Computex 2016, asked how all overclockers took well to extreme overclocks of liquid nitrogen (LN2) at the Intel-sponsored by using "old Haswell" overclocking event power both strive for & then achieve these records of the world. Not that I'd buy it, but the Thermaltake 1500w titanium, unveiled at Computex last month, makes no mention of being Broadwell-E approved; a strange situation titanium now their coronation, ostensibly in free use at Computex to show itself

  I smell something here, or here, something that falls on the advantage of the consumer in the future later when choosing operating cpu & 'box' in 'outdated' operation single power supply

  I would like to label these types of non-descript as unacceptable antics for a particular reason: asked about Facebook to explain exactly what that ships inside the Area-51, the public is directed to the sales page area - 51.com. the screenshot of your above don't tell us anything about the hardware itself. When asked to point blank that ships inside new desktops Broadwell, Joe Olmsted declined to comment, has refused to help raise awareness about the most expensive non-descript present hardware options or not to this day. It's unbearable, given the outdated and ambiguous to the actual sales page, both CGI & text

  If our points of sale, which are intended to evaluate the public of what they buy cannot come from Facebook where the question itself is removed from public display by employee Alien - RC (documented), cannot come from the sales Page, & cannot come from the Product Planner himself on Dell.com, what are we going to do Mr M, in order to better inform us about the material & its specifications? Are we to go it misleading error CGI & ambiguous text? Are you able to contact Alienware for a response & post their response to us here, in order to better inform the public what new operation v Broadwell supply means or can mean for the consumer, past present & future?

  Knowledge in itself can help the buyer choose between 5820 k c. 6800 k for example, as a simple decision made scalability now when it's appropriate, or, in the event of the loss of scalability an opt - in operation now in the face of any literature or deliberate or business help in social media or other outlets to be informed, making the consumer that is unaware of a decision that had to be do now when it reasonably & affordable can. If I ask this question to the Technical Support Arena under my username, can I be guaranteed a timely response or will I ignored as is done in almost all of my technical questions it last year?

  What makes well 850/1500 '? "than the 850/1500 only

  Of some importance is the following: can u get the new 850w / 1500w numbers - if they exist - and if they do, please post them here for the public, so past operating & future buyers may have the "approved" Broadwell from manufacturer to purchase now or later. 850 buyers may like the 1500 later, perhaps accompanied by the warning not to install 800GY 'approved' 1500w operation, but only install 'new' well 1500

  

  Is the safety of the products, EMC and environmental datasheet now obsolete?

  Yes or no: can we expect a revised report of the compliance test for 'new Broadwell' approved psu?

  Mr President, here & now is as good a time & place as any to make these distinctions, if they exist. The doubting Thomas is waiting with impatience the results of your research in these areas above & below

  As all the previous Area-51 R2 buyers are the last people on Earth who still can not spend processor Broadwell-E due to no support Alienware a month after the debut of well, This is due to a 'no-Broadwell-E' authorized unsuited to the American system power?

  If past operation of buyer power is sufficient to run well Finally, why are new buyers well requested option to a power of good, while the new buyers of Haswell are prohibited to?

  If the power supply of the new buyer is not enough to run well Finally, why are new buyers Haswell prohibited access to it at the time of the purchase?
  

  Why is well approved psu an element of equal access to all buyers & most of all, why is not backward compatible with the Hwell? Why two options of PSU & the only "best option"?

  What are the documents will be produced - and when - announcing & confirming that all systems of eqwipped Hwell sold currently passed & future are also in fact approved material - & otherwise approved - why not

  Can you provide a majority or all of the above, or should we stay on Facebook & Twitter?

  At your leisure...

  Oh. There is more

  Please find & view the reference number of the new Aurora R5 850w, which is capable of powering of double - 300 watt cards & is far superior to the Area-51 850 watt who cannot supply double cards of 250 watts. There may be in the population of Area-51 owners who want to "pass" to Aurora R5 850 watt later in order to run double 250 watts or cards double 300 watt, without incurring the high cost of the 1500 watts

  We would like to know if the 850 watt in Aurora is also Broadwell-E approved, in order to better integrate into a system if it is the fault of the owner - either by a X 99 micro-ATX card mother swap to Aurora - or simple plug & play in A-51, regardless of whether an operating system or. Compatibility seems in doubt

  Is Aurora 850w approved by good: If so, why Yes... If not, why not

  ('we don't test Skylake R5 with good compatibility, no response from here ', I heard u say?)

  

  Note: Aurora R5 is not "Skylake approved", or Hwell/well approved: it's just one power supply like any other we beings humans are you use to run an Intel High performance after 2013 & my little finger tells me that it is exactly the same one as it was still inside the Area-51, even now. The 850 in R5 should not have to be tested for compatibility with Hwell/well, he should just "be a known" as opposed to marked a "unknown" "untested". What kind of technology company can't know if their power is compatible with all Intel processors or not. Exactly. Google 'the great 2013 Haswell PSU compatibility list'. Transparency. The qwestion is not what what can he do inside the Aurora, but what can he do outside, like a stand-alone. Certainly, it has been tested both within the Aurora & A51 for full compatibility Sky-Hwell-well, to say or think otherwise is absurd

  Option of the A51 Haswell 850/1500 before = compatible: Yes No as above

• focus on support of permission level on the ray on nexus 9000 running 7.0 (3) I1 (3)

  Dear experts,

  I'm trying to configure support for privilege level of authorization on RADIUS on race nexus 9000 7.0 (3) I1 (3) and I get the following message is displayed:

  Orders for authorization of aaa Tor-SW-CAB-B (config) # default RADIUS local group

  Group of RADIUS is not supported for approval of order
  could not update the aaa configuration

  In addition, command "exec of RBAC authorization" not taken in charge.

  I want to configure the privilege level for the user add 'enable' password after login to the switch. And according to his privilege, he can/cannot change the configuration.

  I use ISE/RADIUS for authentication, authorization and accounting. The configuration as follows:

  Group AAA authentication login default RADIUS
  default group AAA RADIUS accounting

  Same ISE/RADIUS configuration works very well with other cisco switches/routers in the network.

  Comment on how to fix this problem is highly appreciated.

  Best regards

  Mohammad Taamneh

  Hi Mohammad,.

  A couple of things to note:

  1 command authorization is not available with RADIUS. For example, if you want to use this feature, you can use GANYMEDE +.

  2 NX - OS doesn't "understand" privilege level. Indeed, user roles are used. For example,.

  shell:roles=network-operator vdc-admin 

  For more info check out the following document: http://www.cisco.com/c/en/us/td/docs/switches/datacenter/sw/6_x/nx-os/security/configuration/guide/b_Cisco_Nexus_7000_NX-OS_Security_Configuration_Guide__Release_6-x/b_Cisco_Nexus_7000_NX-OS_Security_Configuration_Guide__Release_6-x_chapter_0101.html Thank you for rating helpful posts!

• ACS 5 limited user account

  Hi, I have cisco ACS 5.2 and you want to create the user account of technician, with only some commands.

  How can I achieve this?

  Thank you

  Hello

  It is possible of course.

  This paper (part of it) shows approval of order on acs 5.x

  http://www.Cisco.com/en/us/products/ps9911/products_configuration_exampl...

  HTH

  Amjad
  Sent by Cisco Support technique iPad App

• GANYMEDE + authentication and authorization on IOS XR

  Hi all

  I tried to connect several devices IOS - XR on our laboratory (ASR, RSG and CRS) to our server GANYMEDE + (Cisco Secure ACS, release 4.2 (0)). The objective is that the GANYMEDE would achieve authentication authorization and control the user for all CLI connection non-console (telnet and SSH) types. I don't use any HTTP server to access devices and I want to keep the connection to the console to the powers the.

  I have several devices connected to this GANYMEDE with the following configuration related to AAA. I would like to implement the same principles on the IOS - XR, but given that the command structure is different and I could not understand how to do this using the Manuel, I need your expert help:

  AAA new-model

  !

  !

  AAA Ganymede Server + acs servers group

  Server

  !

  AAA authentication login default local

  AAA authentication login local_vty local

  AAA authentication local console connection

  AAA authentication login acs acs-servers-group local group

  AAA authorization exec default group Ganymede +.

  AAA authorization commands 15 acs_cmds group Ganymede +.

  AAA authorization commands 15 local_cmds no

  !

  !

  !

  !

  !

  AAA - the id of the joint session

  !

  Saute...

  !

  username * secret privilege 15 5 *.

  !

  Saute...

  !

  GANYMEDE server host 7 key

  RADIUS-server application made

  !

  Saute...

  !

  Line con 0

  StopBits 1

  line to 0

  StopBits 1

  line vty 0 4

  exec-timeout 0 0

  privilege level 15

  authorization orders 15 acs_cmds

  DCC connection authentication

  preferred transport telnet

  transport of entry all

  line vty 5 15

  exec-timeout 0 0

  * Note: Device to IOS - XR run versions 4.1.2 and 4.2.0

  Many thanks for any help that you could provide

  Lior

  Lior,

  You must return the task ID and/or groups of task in order to make this work. According to my experience, working with these platforms is it is really unnecessary to proceed with approval of order if you trust the task-ID/groups, which are integrated in the ASR.

  The flow for Ganymede command auth for these devices is a bit different than your IOS essentially traditional (unless something has changed in the last 6 months), if the user tries to run a command, the Ganymede auth command is triggered if the user executes a command that falls under the umbrella of task. If she's not here command permission is never triggered.

  Here are some documents that I feel will help you:

  https://supportforums.Cisco.com/docs/doc-15944

  Thank you

  Tarik Admani
  * Please note the useful messages *.

• ACS 5.2.0.26 with two areas

  I try to spend 4.2 ACS production plant that uses Windows Server installed on GBA as authentication mechanism underlying to 5.2 ACS who joined the field.  I have read several posts and that you have not yet found a solution to my problem.

  So, we have a forest/fields of the domain X and is where the ACS server is bound.  We have a domain forest/other Y.  We have two = transitive trust relationship between the two areas.  Users can authenticate correctly if they specify the domain name.  However, if they leave out of the field, only users in the field X can authenticate.

  For example, to authenticate the following work:

  X\username field

  Y\username field

  user name - if a domain user name X

  What does not work for authentication is:

  user name - if a domain user name Y

  How can I tell ACS to authenticate users to a list of specific areas, perhaps in a certain order, or perhaps a default domain.  We have many more users in the field Y.  So if I had to define a field by default, I could assign domain Y and tell users in domain X to be sure to put the field on the front.  Otherwise, it seems that I could move the AD link to the domain Y.  However, while the confidence is there, the field is in another University and I prefer to keep the ACS server bound to the domain of X.

  When I try to search groups directory, I get only the X domain groups.  I can't even manually type the groups in domain Y.  He accepts, but they do not work.  Inevitably, it results in an error of 22056 object was not found in the point of sale applicable identity. if I omit the domain Y.

  Any help is appreciated.  If more information is needed to help, please let me know what you need.

  Thank you!

  Jodie

  Jodie,

  Are unique samaccountname across the forest? This seems to be that a kind of trust related question and I have seen this crop up lately, here's an article that might help you identify the type of approval in order to make this work:

  https://supportforums.Cisco.com/thread/2162234

  Thank you

  Tarik Admani
  * Please note the useful messages *.

• How does the role of 'Sender' with the ' I need to sign: last "option?

  I created a form in Adobe Acrobat DC which requires three explicit electronic signatures in order to complete:

  1. The seller, who prepares the form by filling in the initial details for order
  2. The customer, who fills in the additional contact information and confirms the correct order details and accept the terms and conditions
  3. Head of sales, who initially will send the document for signatures through the Services of eSign Adobe DC and sign to approve the order

  After some trial and error, I realized that the conversion of a form Acrobat DC to form DC eSign model ignores the role of "signatory" Acrobat DC and found the following roles to reflect without requires me to manually reassign any role field:

  Signatory	Adobe Acrobat DC	Adobe eSign Services DC
  seller	Signatory 1	Participant 1
  customer	Signatory 2	Participant 2
  Head of sales	Sender	Sender

  Sales Manager distributes the form on eSign DC site, select recipients sign decree entered and incoming email address of the seller, the follow-up by the customer' s. In addition, the head of sales checks that I sign and specifies that they will sign last. As far as my intuition and in the documentation research continues, it seems to me that everything should work properly at this point. However, when the form reaches the seller, it always assigns the role of Participant 1 to the sender fields, the result is that the seller is prompted to sign for them as the head of sales at this point. When the document reaches finally the sender, head of sales, for the signature, they are requested to do so in a generated signature field automatically rooted to the bottom of the form.

  A page of the documentation says that the role of Participant 1 are attributed to the sender fields if the sender says that they must sign First - which leads me to believe that it must interpret it as it's own participant role associated to the person sending the document when I sign last is specified. This response suggests to use the last role to this effect - but no role there, although involvement may be to use the role of Participant N , where N is total number of participants.

  So I have a few questions, here:

  1. What is the purpose of the role of the sender ?
  2. Should I be assigned the role of Participant 3 fields that the sender will fill last, instead?

  Hello Adamb90074111,

  According to my recommendation, I emphasize the use of Participant role creating model in EchoSign. Thus, the role of the sender would become 1 Participant (if the sender signs everything first) or participating "n" if he finally signed.

  Kind regards

  -Usman

• Adobe Creative Cloud Student edition

  I downloaded the Adobe Creative nails student edition two weeks ago and still have not been able to download it. The order status pending eligibility document, and I wonder how long it will take or if there is anything I send will speed up the process because I'm really work. We hope to hear from someone, thank you. Sylvia

  Hi Sylvia,.

  I approved your order for publishing CC student and Professor (one year) and will be available for download within a few hours.

  See please download and install creative Cloud applications to problems during installation.

  ^ Ani