We, and MSP in the eastern US, are bidding on a long-term infrastructure maintenance agreement with a private school in which we would maintain their existing aging Cisco infrastructure and eventually migrate to modern hardware.
Three buildings over two campuses. 24 switches. No end-user support.
We don't have Cisco expertise, so we're hiring this part out.
DMs are open!
Starting in the last week, two users at one client have reported seeing this warning - once in Outlook and once in the MS admin site.
Of course, MFA is enforced, and the sign-in logs indicate "MFA requirement satisfied by claim in the token."
Also, enforcement began in February...of 2025, so why are we seeing this now?
This warning is in error, right?
Hey, everyone
Regarding my post the other day, I have an example, which some of you asked for.
Today, a client's copier started prompting for its SharePoint credentials. Until they were entered, no one could scan to SharePoint.
According to the generally accepted 3×3 impact-urgency matrix, this would be a medium- or high-priority issue.
Let's assume the worst-case scenario: that it's a high-priority issue and our SLA is one hour.
Over the course of the two hours, we received six emails from our client and sent five.
Because they expressed urgency (they needed it done by the end of the day), I ignored other high-priority tickets, allowing those tickets to unfairly (?) age.
So, should I have:
a. blindly adhered to our SLA and worked the other, high-priority tickets to keep them from aging and allowing the scanner issue to bleed into the next day, or
b. artificially raise this ticket's priority and let the other same-priority tickets age?
Thank you!
Edits
Some of you questioned timing/what took so long, so here's the timeline:
| Relative Time | Sender | Summary |
|---|---|---|
| 0:00 | client | Initial ticket: can't scan to cloud/server; needs Konica login |
| 0:11 | client | Follow-up - urgent; audit deadline tomorrow |
| 0:13 | ntw2 | Acknowledged; looking into it |
| 0:41 | ntw2 | Sent password image |
| 1:04 | client | Can't read full image; asking if last char is "1" |
| 1:12 | ntw2 | Sent password as plain text |
| 1:12 | client | Tried admin tab; no go. now seeing SharePoint login prompt |
| 1:12 | ntw2 | Provided username |
| 1:16 | client | Will try both; will report back |
| 1:18 | client | Asking if she should use the provided password after SharePoint login |
| 1:19 | ntw2 | Confirmed full credentials |
| 1:25 | client | Resolved, it worked |
Do you blindly adhere to your SLAs?
For example, if you have a low-priority issue that's in flight (the client is responding to your updates in just a few minutes), do you really table your responses while you work higher-priority tickets, potentially allowing for hours- or days-long replies from your team, or do you keep the ball in the air for low-priority issues for rapidly responding clients?
Updates:
The reading compensation in this thread is embarrassing. At no point did I mention:
- solving tickets, only updating
- responding at the last minute