Duplicates tickets when integration mail in copy

[robinkyo]

• Used Zammad version:
  version 6.2.0-1704792691.00f9f486.bullseye
• Used Zammad installation type: (source, package, docker-compose, …)
  PACKAGE
• Operating system:
  DEBIAN

Hello Team, I have an “issue” with Duplicates tickets in this case :

When customer send mail to a others guys and put the integration mail in copy thats create a tickets in Zammad - thats OK

But when the others Guy do a reply all, and respond to the customer, thats create a new tickets and do not implement the first one - i think because they dont have the N°tickets in the title of the mail.

Can we do something for thats ?

Thanks all

[dvanzuijlekom]

Go to Channels → Email → Settings:

Also, you might want to upgrade to the latest version.

[robinkyo]

Thanks for your help, seems to be what i need to setup !

But do you have more information about how thats works ? What they want to say by “Search for Follow-up” ? :

Something like thats ? :

• Attachment : I think check if any same attachement in the existant tickets ( Name, format, file size?)
• Body : search for pottentially same string character in body of others tickets ?
• References : I dont understand for this one

I

[dvanzuijlekom]

@robinkyo

• Attachment : I think check if any same attachement in the existant tickets ( Name, format, file size?)

I’m not exactly sure at which level this works, I would imagine the examples you give, yes.

@robinkyo

• Body : search for pottentially same string character in body of others tickets ?

Yeah, it tries to match e-mail body contents with previously seen tickets and if there is a large enough match, it’ll decide the e-mail is probably a response to the existing ticket.

@robinkyo

• References : I dont understand for this one

This looks at internal references inside the e-mail message, which are usually not visible, only if you inspect the raw contents of the message. This helps mail clients in general in determining which messages are related and part of the same thread and Zammad makes use of this mechanism too.

Also, as mentioned in the docs:

Please note that searching in attachment and body might lead to false follow-up detection.

There’s a reason we don’t do too aggressive follow-up detection, because some users are apparently used to clicking “Reply” on an earlier e-mail from the Helpdesk, changing the subject line and ask a totally unrelated new question. This does not reset the In-Reply-To or References headers in their e-mail and would cause their new question to become a new article in an existing older ticket, which is usually not what we want.

[robinkyo]

@dvanzuijlekom

There’s a reason we don’t do too aggressive follow-up detection, because some users are apparently used to clicking “Reply” on an earlier e-mail from the Helpdesk, changing the subject line and ask a totally unrelated new question. This does not reset the In-Reply-To or References headers in their e-mail and would cause their new question to become a new article in an existing older ticket, which is usually not what we want.

Ok i undesrtand, use reference seems to be the best and relayble solution.
But can be dangerous if we have customer who take a old mail and use reply and edit with new subect to open a new tickets

Thanks for your help !

[robinkyo]

I just reminder something can help us with the case :

@dvanzuijlekom

here’s a reason we don’t do too aggressive follow-up detection, because some users are apparently used to clicking “Reply” on an earlier e-mail from the Helpdesk, changing the subject line and ask a totally unrelated new question. This does not reset the In-Reply-To or References headers in their e-mail and would cause their new question to become a new article in an existing older ticket, which is usually not what we want.

If we use the settings to do not re-open a new incident if the ticket is close, or do not re open if close, after X days.

Need to test, but can be OK ?

What do you think ?

[dvanzuijlekom]

Yes, that will work too. You might have to instruct your agents to use Pending close more often instead of immediately closing tickets, should a customer actually respond to a ticket which has already been closed. But it is still cleaner and easier to merge a new ticket into an existing one than it is to split up a non-related response from an older ticket.