logical system name vs. destination name - CUA -

[Former Member]

Hey experts,

at the moment I´m thinking about using the CUA in our SAP environment for role distribution.

In this scenario I need destinations to the child systems (of course!). In all manuals I found it say, that i HAVE to create destinations which have the same name as the logical system. However, this is not possible cause this is against corporate name conventions.

So I tried to use different destination names, but when I use the function "text comparison" (SU01->Roles) it always fails and says that the destination to the child system is missing.

So here my question: How can I tell the CUA not to search for destinations named like the logical system????

Thx in advance, nice weekend

Oliver

[Former Member]

Oliver,

My understanding of ALE is that the logical system and the RFC destination must be the same name. That's how the it determines the relationship when creating the model.

The naming standard outlined in the CUA cookbook and other documentation is an SAP standard at many places.

Cheers,

Ben

[Former Member]

Hey Ben,

well somehow you are right. But usually it´s not necessary to use the same name for destinations. When you re using IDOCs for example, you can tell the system in transaction WE20 which dest to use.

So is there a similar possibility at the CUA scenario?

Thx

Oliver

[Former Member]

Not that I'm aware of.

Cheers,

Ben

[Former Member]

No one an idea?

[Former Member]

As SAP said today... no way to use any other destination name

[Former Member]

Oliver,

When you run "text comparison" it checks for the SCUA settings. I'm almost certain if you run SCUA and click change and click SAVE without changing, it will have the same error as the "text comparison". If this is the case you have to repair your CUA. Let me know if you need help with CUA repairs.

[Former Member]

Hey John,

thx for your reply.

You are right, it checks the configurations made in SCUA. The problem is, that you can´t define a custom destination name different then den name of the logical system.

Since the CUA uses ALE, you can manually change the used destinations at WE20. However, this only works for the IDOCs exchanged. For "text-comparison" the original destination is still needed.

And that's exactly the prob! How can I tell the CUA, which destination has to be used for text-comparison.

:)... on this question, SAP simply said... "you can´t" ....

Greez Oliver

[Former Member]

Too make a long story short....I have to agree with SAP that this cannot be done.

Now fix that CUA

[Former Member]

g :=) I give you 10 points for this answer... just for agreeing with sap.

Unfortunately I have to keep the old destination names until SAP introduces the feature "manual destination determination"

Thx,

Oliver

[Former Member]

Thanks Oliver!

I might need to get Basis involve on your goals "at the moment I´m thinking about using the CUA in our SAP environment for role distribution."

I have seen some awesome transport landscape design from other Basis guys. Try to ping the Basis area and see if they can help you.

Thanks for the points!

[Former Member]

Hey John

I´m workin at the Basis-Team...

So what now! Thx!

Regards,

Oliver

[Former Member]

Oliver,

Well I am just a security guy. Since you are both Security and Basis guy, designing your STMS landscape should be a piece of cake. In seriousness, have you tried posting in the Basis area and see if they can help.

This is way beyond my expertise...

Good Luck!

[Former Member]

Hey John,

piece of cake ;).. that's what I thought at first. Unfortunately it´s not that easy. This is because of partially really strict restrictions within the SAP-Software.

At the one Module, you can choose the destination, is used for a particular group of functions. At the next, you simply can´t. SAP says "you need to have a destination, named as the logical system name". And there is no way around.

Maybe I´am the first guy being disturbed by this "feature"....

Of cause, I already placed several posts within the basis section... but still.. no way around. In one case I even opened a ticket at SAP... (I already posted the answer above) ....

Thx anyways!

Oliver

[Former Member]

Hey Oliver,

Well, you're not the only one being bugged by this feature. 

Do you have any news on when SAP may fix this?  My issue is that I have 'overloaded' user ids - either my CUAUSER ID must have all the ALEREMOTE authorisations or my ALEREMOTE ID must have all the CUAUSER authorisations - and I'm not too happy with that.

I think that also means I cannot protect the RFC destinations themselves with separate authorisations.

Thanks for starting the thread.

Sean

PS - Later edit: Or maybe I should create Trusting relationships with current user checked?