-
Suggestion
-
Resolution: Won't Fix
-
None
-
None
Some customers have a large number of customers that they would like to access JIRA Service Desk, but instead of using the JIRA Internal Directory, they would like to utilize Crowd to manage their users. This is most relevant when they want to authenticate via Crowd SSO. Currently, they cannot do this and still benefit from agent based pricing. Crowd does not recognize Service Desk Customers as a distinct and separate group from regular JIRA users.
Atlassian Crowd is a separate product and therefore if you wish to use Crowd for SSO, you will need to purchase a Crowd license that is large enough for your user base. Customers in JIRA Service Desk, while free in JIRA Service Desk, will consume a license in Crowd.
A suggestion to enable both remote Crowd and local authentication in JIRA has been created. Please vote and comment on this issue to communicate your need for a feature such as this JSD-1244
- is blocked by
-
CWD-4642 Incorporate JIRA Service Desk "Customer" functionality
- Closed
- is related to
-
JSDCLOUD-1052 Crowd does not recognize agent based pricing for Service Desk Customers
- Closed
-
JSDSERVER-1052 Crowd does not recognize agent based pricing for Service Desk Customers
- Closed
-
JSDSERVER-1244 Create a Crowd SSO authenticator that will allow Customers to be authenticated from the local directory
- Gathering Interest
-
JSDCLOUD-1244 Create a Crowd SSO authenticator that will allow Customers to be authenticated from the local directory
- Reviewing
- relates to
-
JSDSERVER-923 JIRA + JSD 2.0 + Crowd (SSO) - Customers can't log in
-
- Closed
-
-
SDS-33045 Loading...
- causes
-
DESK-3689 Loading...
- mentioned in
-
Page Loading...
-
Page Loading...
-
Page Loading...
-
Page Loading...
-
Page Loading...
-
Page Loading...
-
Page Loading...
-
Page Loading...
-
Page Loading...
-
Page Loading...
. Crowd and Jira are different products I agree but they are within the same family of application should support each other and this should include jira customers within jira service desk.
To send me links to issue which not active displays that I’m paying support for a problem we have that has no plain to be fixed.
JSDSERVER-1052= Resolved/invalidCWD-4116= Resolved/won’t fixBut it not that I’m paying a one off fee for the bug to be fixed but I would be paying an extra $3,500 each year to work around this problem. That more then we paid for the 500 users license each year. That’s a cost each year from that point forward. If the bug was then fixed (which I think is unlikely) I can’t then drop the license count to 500 which means I’m paying the extra each year, every year.
I would understand that other 3^rd^ party solution would pay for each SSO user. I don’t expect this from someone who provide both crowd and Jira service desk.
The problem is that amount of the cost and then for each year for support. If we were talking about full jira user or full jira service desk agents I could understand but not for Jira customer.
As I also explain. We are a full Atlassian site running the full family of applications. This is a 3^rd^ network we have this installed we are up to date with support of all application. We already have a full unlimited crowd installs and we match our installation on this network. Just a smaller set of users.
Because we use a number of Atlassian applications linked into crowd I have no issues using crowd using for this set of users. The license model for crowd mean we need a 500 user’s licences to cover this. That I agree with. I also agree with having a crowd license to cover jira service desk agents.
But for jira service desk customer I disagree with. I also believe that increased cost in crowd between 500 and 500+ is giant to only include jira service desk customer. Its also giant the support to the 500+ crowd user to again for us to support jira service desk customers. This is more then we paid at the start and this is a yearly cost.
A jira service desk customer is never going to login to any other of are Atlassian applications which again if why I disagree with the increased cost.