Region is a red herring, except for government threats.
Otherwise, the goal is to give each agent access to an arbitrary subset of users, so it's harder to recruit an agent who can access the "target" victim customer.
Otherwise, the goal is to give each agent access to an arbitrary subset of users, so it's harder to recruit an agent who can access the "target" victim customer.
* Balancing the assignment of users to appropriate agents
* Less flexibility for agents to be specialized (instead of an agent responding to all X related tickets everywhere in the world, an agent must respond to X, Y, and Z from these specific users)
* Handling user coverage when agents are busy, PTO, etc. The spirit of splitting agent access would mean agents would need to request access from an out-of-region authority in order to help with things last minute. An authority who will be expected to be responsive 24/7 without also being an attack vector
Technically, the current model is a full M customer x N agents mapping. All customers served by all Agents. Adding some 0's to that mapping should certainly be possible without sacrificing much from current system. No way to know how many is reasonable
All that said, there is a natural logic that arises from this 'analysis' - Limit access to customers who are inactive, or who rarely have issues. A common sense addition would be to raise their default priority for when they do interact.