<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" xmlns:rdf="http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#" xmlns:taxo="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/taxonomy/" version="2.0">
  <channel>
    <title>topic Feature Request NOT in Filters in Expedition Discussions</title>
    <link>https://live.paloaltonetworks.com/t5/expedition-discussions/feature-request-not-in-filters/m-p/271679#M1712</link>
    <description>&lt;P&gt;Some of the predifined filters are great, Show Duplicate Names and Values is great for identifying duplicate objects to be deleted (or merged).&amp;nbsp; Show Duplicate Names is great for identifying objects that need more investigation.&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;When you are working with Panorama it is common to have Duplicate Names as objects will exist in different device groups including shared generally this is fine and wont impact anything if pushed to the device providing the values are the same.&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;However usually if I want to identify potential issues I need to see&amp;nbsp;Duplicate Names and NOT Duplicate Names and Values.&amp;nbsp; These will show only the duplicate objects the don't have duplicate values.&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;As an example if I have 1655 duplicate names and 1660 duplicate names and values I only need to worry about 5 objects but how can you identify just those 5 objects.&lt;/P&gt;</description>
    <pubDate>Thu, 20 Jun 2019 13:25:49 GMT</pubDate>
    <dc:creator>CHammock</dc:creator>
    <dc:date>2019-06-20T13:25:49Z</dc:date>
    <item>
      <title>Feature Request NOT in Filters</title>
      <link>https://live.paloaltonetworks.com/t5/expedition-discussions/feature-request-not-in-filters/m-p/271679#M1712</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;Some of the predifined filters are great, Show Duplicate Names and Values is great for identifying duplicate objects to be deleted (or merged).&amp;nbsp; Show Duplicate Names is great for identifying objects that need more investigation.&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;When you are working with Panorama it is common to have Duplicate Names as objects will exist in different device groups including shared generally this is fine and wont impact anything if pushed to the device providing the values are the same.&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;However usually if I want to identify potential issues I need to see&amp;nbsp;Duplicate Names and NOT Duplicate Names and Values.&amp;nbsp; These will show only the duplicate objects the don't have duplicate values.&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;As an example if I have 1655 duplicate names and 1660 duplicate names and values I only need to worry about 5 objects but how can you identify just those 5 objects.&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Thu, 20 Jun 2019 13:25:49 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://live.paloaltonetworks.com/t5/expedition-discussions/feature-request-not-in-filters/m-p/271679#M1712</guid>
      <dc:creator>CHammock</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2019-06-20T13:25:49Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: Feature Request NOT in Filters</title>
      <link>https://live.paloaltonetworks.com/t5/expedition-discussions/feature-request-not-in-filters/m-p/275493#M1785</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;You are right.&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;We have a FR for this imrplementation, but we do not have it in the short time plans as all the calculations it would imply, but it will arrive.&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Tue, 09 Jul 2019 07:09:54 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://live.paloaltonetworks.com/t5/expedition-discussions/feature-request-not-in-filters/m-p/275493#M1785</guid>
      <dc:creator>dgildelaig</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2019-07-09T07:09:54Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: Feature Request NOT in Filters</title>
      <link>https://live.paloaltonetworks.com/t5/expedition-discussions/feature-request-not-in-filters/m-p/275584#M1791</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;I wonder, if the feature for adding NOT logic to the Filters is complicated, would a simpler request be to add a predifined filter that is "Duplicate Addresses NOT with Duplicate Values" for the interim period?&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Tue, 09 Jul 2019 15:55:18 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://live.paloaltonetworks.com/t5/expedition-discussions/feature-request-not-in-filters/m-p/275584#M1791</guid>
      <dc:creator>CHammock</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2019-07-09T15:55:18Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: Feature Request NOT in Filters</title>
      <link>https://live.paloaltonetworks.com/t5/expedition-discussions/feature-request-not-in-filters/m-p/278730#M1821</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;Please, make this request to fwmigrate at paloaltonetworks dot com so my colleagues take a note on it.&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;With some luck, we can get it into the set of new features during the coming 7 days.&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;Best&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Wed, 24 Jul 2019 19:00:51 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://live.paloaltonetworks.com/t5/expedition-discussions/feature-request-not-in-filters/m-p/278730#M1821</guid>
      <dc:creator>dgildelaig</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2019-07-24T19:00:51Z</dc:date>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>

