Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Mapping for mailbox rule events #1112

Open
eliraz-levi opened this issue Jun 13, 2024 · 2 comments
Open

Mapping for mailbox rule events #1112

eliraz-levi opened this issue Jun 13, 2024 · 2 comments

Comments

@eliraz-levi
Copy link
Contributor

eliraz-levi commented Jun 13, 2024

Email services provide the capability to configure email forwarding, inbox rules, and more.
Such configuration may include complex settings. For example:
If an incoming email includes a subject with word “invoice” and the sender is ‘*.amazon.com’ then move the email to the mailbox folder “amazon invoices”.
Example of such a rule on M365 platform:
1
2

We may use the Entity Management class, while the entity is the relevant mailbox.
However, we need an attribute or object to identify the email service provider as well as the rule that was created or modified.
One idea that we discussed in the mapping weekly meeting is creating a new Profile that represents mailbox settings.

cc: @zschmerber-atlassian @cmcginley-splunk

@eliraz-levi eliraz-levi changed the title Representation for mailbox rules Mapping for mailbox rule events Jun 13, 2024
@eliraz-levi
Copy link
Contributor Author

@mikeradka - we would be happy to have your input here

@cmcginley-splunk
Copy link

cmcginley-splunk commented Jun 17, 2024

@eliraz-levi Sorry, meant to chime in here last Friday.

We don't have a GitLab issue tracking this (tracking it internally), but @mikeradka and I are indeed running into the same issue when trying to map Set-Mailbox.

The options we discussed included:

  1. creating an Email profile (as you suggest)
  2. adding a mailbox object to the Entity Management class

We were planning on making one of these changes in our external extension, and then possibly trying to promote it here to the core schema. I'm not sure which direction Mike was more inclined to though.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

2 participants