iDocs in the Spotlight – Indirect Access Causes a Stir Again

iDocs in the Spotlight – Indirect Access Causes a Stir Again

Share this article

Share on facebook
Share on google
Share on twitter
Share on linkedin

For months now, Indirect Access is a hot-button issue, which nobody knows to treat the right way. The discussion is mostly about what Indirect Access really means or what can rather be rated as simple information enrichment of the SAP system. With a new statement about the use of iDocs the discussion starts all over again …

New information heats up the discussion about Indirect Access again

During the last few weeks, we were constantly reporting on new pieces of information regarding Indirect Access. For example, there was the apparent connection to Salesforce, as well as the new evaluation of technical users. Now there’s a tiny, but not unimportant piece of new information going round.

Watch out, iDocs-Users!

We should all pay attention to the statement made by a SAP employee in a discussion in the DSAG (the German-speaking SAP user group) blog, which said: Even the automatic start of an iDoc means Indirect Access. It doesn’t even matter, if the data is processed by a licensed employee afterwards or is running through the SAP system fully automatically.

This statement can be seen as a very controversial topic to most of the SAP users, as you can hardly avoid using iDocs while electronic data exchange between a third-party system and a SAP system.

In reverse conclusion this means that every information, which is automatically send to the SAP system, is Indirect Access. It doesn’t matter if it’s a fax, an e-mail, a batch input, an iDoc, or the like.

How should I treat this issue?

The topic of Indirect Access is still hotly debated, but hardly defined. Except for a poor statement by SAP that the provision of information from the SAP system isn’t counted as Indirect Access, nothing’s really determined.
Now it’s the task to find out, if the statement of the SAP employee was an official one or only his own opinion. Should the statement be official, then there must follow a deeper discussion, which is similar to the discussion about the Third Party Foundation use.
We advise DSAG members, who are affected by this, to ask for support by the DSAG to shed some light on the topic. Moreover, SAP should officially define a consistent position to the subject, ideally in cooperation with the DSAG.
If the statement of the SAP turns out as an official one, SAP users should think about suspending all iDoc-based processes, and rather go on working manually. As an example you could take that the engine costs of the sales order processing are often disproportionate to the benefit of the interface.



Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Contact us

Send a message

Request a callback

Contact us