Skip to Main Content
IBM Sterling

This portal is to open public enhancement requests for IBM Sterling products and services. To view all of your ideas submitted to IBM, create and manage groups of Ideas, or create an idea explicitly set to be either visible by all (public) or visible only to you and IBM (private), use the IBM Unified Ideas Portal (

Shape the future of IBM!

We invite you to shape the future of IBM, including product roadmaps, by submitting ideas that matter to you the most. Here's how it works:

Search existing ideas

Start by searching and reviewing ideas and requests to enhance a product or service. Take a look at ideas others have posted, and add a comment, vote, or subscribe to updates on them if they matter to you. If you can't find what you are looking for,

Post your ideas
  1. Post an idea.

  2. Get feedback from the IBM team and other customers to refine your idea.

  3. Follow the idea through the IBM Ideas process.

Specific links you will want to bookmark for future use

Welcome to the IBM Ideas Portal ( - Use this site to find out additional information and details about the IBM Ideas process and statuses.

IBM Unified Ideas Portal ( - Use this site to view all of your ideas, create new ideas for any IBM product, or search for ideas across all of IBM. - Use this email to suggest enhancements to the Ideas process or request help from IBM for submitting your Ideas.

Status Not under consideration
Created by Guest
Created on Apr 25, 2022

The ITX mapper needs to be capable of supporting Sterling B2Bi Envelope/Control Number management is a similar manner to how it support ITXA in order to fully leverage ITX maps within the Sterling B2Bi product

This ask effectively is to expand the Sterling Data Harness called within ITX maps to support more than just delimited from the Sterling Envelope but allow for a get & increment control number(s) as well as all sender/receiver/qualifer/version etc calls from the Sterling Envelope in the same manner as the Sterling Envelope process do behind the scenes today. This way we can run an ITX map with full envelope generation within the ITX Map service. Why? Well this actually seems to be the way ITX is designed to work only with ITXA as the envelope manager but if we already have Sterling doing this we don't really need or want to run two envelope management systems especially if we are going to have Sterling and ITX maps being called for a single partner facing output from parallel internal job runs. Additionally, this would allow us to actually use the ITX Map service within the Sterling BP flow with multiple file inputs and outputs, fully able to leverage ITX's mapping capabilities as calling an ITX map within a Sterling Map call restrict the file input and output to one same as a Sterling Map. This 'IDEA' acompanies another that deals with pain point with using JSON Data with an ITX map within the Sterling 'canned processes' of Document Extraction Service and X12/EDIFACT Envelope Service(s) that are not designed and can not handle JSON data having a single root tag in the same way that XML has and is supported.
  • Guest
    Jun 29, 2022

    Currently not under consideration for General availability. We might revisit and review for if there are critical business challenges.

  • Guest
    May 19, 2022

    Guest, sure the other idea is under B2BI-I-1108 the reason that it's not easily identified is because the two ideas are, this one, which is use Sterling Envelopes without the Sterling DocExtract Process and make the process more pure ITX, OR alternatively fix the Sterling DocExtract process so that even if the Sterling mapper isn't likely to support JSON any time soon at least if you are going to support it with ITX support the JSON single root take issue withing DocExtract the way you do XML data, or similarly.

    I'm not sure if I have a strong opinion which one wins out ideally both should be options, my biggest concern is a volleyball match of each side throwing the issue at the fence at one another and neither happening. Which sort of started with the prior incident ticket which only got closed because our present ask needed differed enveloping but we don't want that to be something we need to do for everything because that doesn't always make sense and adds delay to more real time processes.

  • Guest
    May 5, 2022

    Is the second 'IDEA' is a separate AHA! ? If so, can you provide the number? If not, can you please open one with a bit more detail please?