I am facing a scalability challenge in MyGeotab. I have 11 specific vehicle groups and 10 different zone types (each zone type has its own custom speed limits).I need to trigger email alerts when a vehicle exceeds the zone's speed limit by 5 km/h. If I do this the traditional way, crossing every group with every zone type, I would end up creating 110 individual rules (11×10). This is completely unsustainable to manage.Is there a smart way using Group Hierarchy, Advanced Conditions, or Rule Distribution to solve this matrix problem without duplicating rules? How do you guys handle large-scale setups where specific groups need to respect specific custom zone limits? Thanks!

Best practices to scale Speeding Rules across multiple Groups and Zone Types without redundancy

page-user page-user-bastian-poo-10605 template-account-profile page-status-200 theme-harmony user-guest

Company

Title

That was exactly what was messing up my rules. I was using a higher-level group scope while trying to filter with the Group condition inside the AND logic, which caused the rule to leak and alert vehicles from other sub-groups or unassigned assets underneath. After checking this with specialized support, they confirmed exactly what you just pointed out: the Group condition inside the rule text doesn't restrict the asset scope on its own if the rule's main group assignment is set too high up the tree. Thanks a lot, It really saved my sanity 😅

Hi! I totally get why this looks like overkill from the outside, but our industry kind of forces us into this setup! We work as a contractor in the mining sector. In mining operations down here, things are hyper-regulated: - Multiple Sites (Faenas): We operate across several different mining sites at the same time. Each site has its own dedicated Safety Manager who is legally responsible only for their specific fleet. - Custom Speed Zones: Each site has its own strict internal rules. The speed limits change completely depending on the specific zone (workshops, loading zones, main roads, etc.). Because of that, a generic global policy like "never more than 5km/h over" just doesn't work for us. If a manager at Site A gets an email alert about a truck speeding at Site B, it just creates spam and confusion. To make sure each safety manager only sees alerts for the trucks they actually manage—and based on their specific site limits—we have to split the rules. It's the only way we can comply with the mining companies safety standards! 😵

Hi <a href="/user/eishifun" data-id="1044" data-value="EishiFUN" data-denotation-char="@" class="text-decoration-none mention">@EishiFUN</a>​  and <a href="/user/tony-mcgeough-1053" data-id="1053" data-value="TonyFC-1053" data-denotation-char="@" class="text-decoration-none mention">@TonyFC-1053</a>​  Thank you both so much for the detailed insights and examples!  Tony, that nested OR structure looks incredibly clean for mapping the conditions under a single rule, and Eishi, your point about Group Hierarchy is great for consolidating fleets. However, I have a major concern regarding this "single rule" approach when it comes to Email Notifications.  In MyGeotab, notification rules and distribution lists are tied globally to the Exception Rule itself, not to the specific conditional blocks inside it. If we group all our conditions into a single massive rule using OR operators, we cannot split or discriminate the email routing.  Our strict operational requirement is that if a vehicle from "Group A" exceeds the speed limit, the email must go ONLY to the "Group A" supervisor. If it happens with "Group B", it must go ONLY to the "Group B" supervisor, and so on.  The core issue with my requirement is that I have 9 different vehicle groups and 11 distinct zone types, each with its own custom speed limit per group. To route the emails correctly without mixing them up to the wrong managers, I am forced to split the matrix into individual rules just to assign the correct distribution list to each specific scope. Furthermore, after moving forward with creating the rules individually, I encountered a critical issue that I have already escalated to Geotab Support. Even when isolating the scope into specific rules like this<code>And(
 
 IsValueMoreThan[value=25kmh](
 
 Speed
 
 ), 
 
 InsideArea[zoneType=b263], 
 
 Group[group=b2C7F]
 
)</code>The system is still triggering exceptions and alerting for vehicles that DO NOT belong to the group specified in the condition.  I have attached a diagram to illustrate exactly what is happening in our environment. When setting the condition to trigger only for "Group A", the rule is leaking and triggering alerts for assets that are outside that scope—such as vehicles hanging directly from the parent group "Test Company" (like Vehicle 12, 22, 32 in the diagram) or assets with no specific subgroup assignment. <img src="/forum/plugins/gcs-uploads/files/069Pd000016qTGbIAM.png" alt="Screenshot_20260603_093348" /> I am starting to wonder if I might have structured the condition incorrectly myself. Could you guys guide me on this? Is there a specific way the 'Group' filter needs to be nested inside the 'And' statement to ensure it is strictly respected and doesn't leak vehicles from other branches of the tree?  Given this behavior and the notification routing limitation, I would love to hear your thoughts on how to properly handle this setup. Thanks for your support!

I am facing a scalability challenge in MyGeotab. I have 11 specific vehicle groups and 10 different zone types (each zone type has its own custom speed limits).I need to trigger email alerts when a vehicle exceeds the zone's speed limit by 5 km/h. If I do this the traditional way, crossing every group with every zone type, I would end up creating 110 individual rules (11×10). This is completely unsustainable to manage.Is there a smart way using Group Hierarchy, Advanced Conditions, or Rule Distribution to solve this matrix problem without duplicating rules? How do you guys handle large-scale setups where specific groups need to respect specific custom zone limits? Thanks!

Recent Activity

Best practices to scale Speeding Rules across multiple Groups and Zone Types without redundancy