Dear @Nouha Mhadhbi,

Please review the following regarding the headers “Board Serial Number” and “Board Dump Serial Number.” (Board report snippet is attached for your reference)

If both fields contain the same serial number, what is the purpose of having both? In such cases, we could retain only one of them.

As per my understanding:

• The header “Board Serial Number” contains the first (i.e., unique) serial number.
• If the same serial number appears again in another instance—whether for a cabinet, shelf, or board—it is then placed under the header “Board Dump Serial Number.”

This same rule is already applied in ZAIN-KSA, as I explained at the start of this email trail for your reference.

Thank you
Indrasan

Dear Indrasan,

Diana implemented the addition of Dump Serial Number with ZAIN KSA, and as she explained to Nouha, Dump Serial Number will be a copy of Serial Number, and this what Nouha implemented. I am not sure why we need both to be the same, but it is not a personal openion or view, we need to known exactly what the customer want us to do, so we get that approved by @Hassan Abdine and then we can implement it.

Regards,
Khaled Khalil

Dear @Khaled Khalil,

The serial numbers available in the dump are being parsed as they are—whether unique or duplicate for cabinet/shelf/board. However, when importing into NEP, only unique serial numbers are imported, and duplicates are ignored.

Since our requirement is to retain all serial numbers in NEP, we need to maintain both headers as we did in ZAIN-KSA:

• Serial Number → for unique serial numbers (imported as the primary entry).
• Dump Serial Number → for duplicate serial numbers (imported as secondary entries for cabinet/shelf/board).

This ensures that both unique and duplicate serial numbers are captured in NEP as per dump.

Thank you
Indrasan

Dear Khaled Khalil,

Could you please update on this?

Thank you
Indrasan

This JIRA has now been reassigned to me by the NEP DEV team. However, since the requested header is now available, the JIRA can be closed. It appears the reassignment was done based on header availability, without confirmation on the concerns I had raised.

I am closing this JIRA now and will create a new JIRA to address the issue related to the correct values being displayed under this new header.