Feature request: allow linking a SIM card (Item_DeviceSimcard) to an asset (router / PC / phone), not only to a user

[Smiley-k]

Is there an existing issue for this?

• I have searched the existing issues

Version

11.0.9

---

Actual behavior

SIM cards are managed as component records (Item_DeviceSimcard) and are listed in the
SIM cards section (/front/item_device.php?itemtype=Item_DeviceSimcard).

Today a SIM card can only be assigned to a user:

• The edition form exposes: Serial number, Inventory number, Location, Status, PIN / PIN2 / PUK / PUK2,
  Line, MSIN, User (assigned to), Technician
  (Item_DeviceSimcard::getSpecificities()), and the class implements AssignableItemInterface
  (use AssignableItem).
• There is no field to select the physical device where the SIM is installed (router, PC, phone),
  neither in the list nor in the form.
• On the asset side, SIM cards are not exposed as an attachable component in a usable way:
  the device forms reference Item_DeviceSimcard only through generic JavaScript configuration
  arrays (asset/state type lists), not as a component that can be added to the asset.
• Although the table glpi_items_devicesimcards contains the relation columns items_id / itemtype
  (inherited from Item_Devices), they are never exposed by the UI, and in practice they stay at 0
  (in our instance: 2 SIM cards, both assigned to users, 0 linked to any item).
• The REST API reflects the same gap: GET /Components/Simcard and /Components/Simcard/{id} work,
  but GET /Components/Simcard/{id}/Items returns 500, while for any other component type
  (e.g. /Components/HardDrive/{id}/Items) it returns the list of instances attached to assets
  (with itemtype / items_id).

Workaround used today: the device name is typed into the SIM card's free-text comment field.
It is not searchable in a reliable way, not reportable, and it leaves no history when a SIM is moved
from one device to another.

Expected behavior

Allow a SIM card to be linked to an asset, in addition to (and independently from) the current
user assignment:

1. A new field on the SIM card ("Installed in" / host asset) allowing to pick an item —
   NetworkEquipment (router), Computer (PC/laptop), Phone, etc.
2. The relation visible from the asset side as well (e.g. a SIM cards section/tab or a column),
   with search options on both sides (SIM → device, device → SIM).
3. The relation exposed in the High-Level API (Item_DeviceSimcard with itemtype / items_id,
   and a working /Components/Simcard/{id}/Items endpoint), so imports and integrations can set it.
4. Optional: making it a multiple relation (several SIM cards in one device — e.g. dual-SIM routers).

Why this is needed (use cases)

1. 4G/LTE routers. We run routers with mobile uplinks in offices and branches (main or backup
   channel). We must know which SIM (MSIN, operator, tariff) is installed in which router, per
   location and entity — today this is only a text note.
2. PCs / laptops / tablets with WWAN modules or USB LTE modems — the SIM belongs to the device,
   not to the person using it.
3. Replacement and traceability. When a router fails or a SIM is swapped, we need to see where a
   given SIM has been used and which SIM a device had before (asset history / logs).
4. Incidents and repairs. For a ticket about a router/PC, we want to see its SIM card(s) directly
   on the item, and attach SIM-related operations to the same ticket.
5. Inventory and audit. SIM cards are physical assets with serial numbers and monthly costs;
   “which SIM is in which device” must be reportable (by entity, location, status), not stored in
   free-text comments.
6. Inventory agent data. The GLPI agent already reports SIM card information; without a
   device link the reported card cannot be matched with the device it was found in.

Related issues

• #20491 — “Adding Simcards component to phone asset produces SQL exception” (closed) — shows the
  item ↔ SIM relation was attempted/reachable but is currently broken/not supported.
• #25187 — feature request about simcards[] operator / phone-number fields during inventory.
• #21888 — standardization of Simcard PIN/PUK rights.

Alternative considered

Creating the SIM as a separate generic asset (e.g. “SIM card” custom asset type) and linking it to
the device — this duplicates the existing component model, loses MSIN/PIN/PUK fields and the
inventory-agent compatibility, so it is not a proper substitute.

[tayfuryldz]

The existing items_id/itemtype relation makes this look more like exposing an existing component relationship than inventing a second assignment model. I'd keep assigned user and installed asset independent: a SIM can belong to a person operationally while physically sitting in a router. Existing rows with items_id=0 also give a straightforward compatibility path.

[Smiley-k]

You are looking from the perspective of issuing a SIM card and managing the issuance of SIM cards to people. Eg I'll bring the briefcase. 2 thousand terminals, each terminal is issued 3 SIM cards, different operators (for backup work and so on), the total number of SIM cards is 6000 pieces, each SIM card is linked to the terminal, not to a person, since the terminal itself =pc is also not linked to a person, but is linked to companies.

First and foremost, the SIM card belongs to the company, and only then is it issued either to an employee or to equipment.(For example, ATMs. 🙂)