Dear G S
New transaction LI21(RLLI2110) was developed after improving old report RLLI2100.
However , LI21 is still weak in certain areas like serial number , reason of movement amongst others.
This is the reason why SAP itself suggests either RLLI2100 report or BADI LE_WM_INV_WM_IM !!
As far as MB11 is concerned, its just a band aid , I believe.
Would you like to allow whse people to apply that much brain to enter st type and bin every time they want to clear IM for serial numbers in MB11 ?
As far as your error goes , that item still remains in LI21 , I dont think so ? Did you check matl doc was posted correctly in MB11 or are you seeing correct st bin (Inv rec) in LI21 ?
Now for RLLI2100 report , you can definitely use this one as SAP suggests it.
However in this case , you will have to decide how to maintain and train people to use both LI21 and RLLI2100 in non serialized and serialized scenarios.
I personally would always like that whse people use one transaction for IM clearing that handles everything.So that process is simple and you dont create confusion to use different transactions in different scenarios.
I believe, BADI LE_WM_INV_WM_IM strengthens LI21 in MM-IM constellation to great extent.
With it , you will have additional screen to enter serial numbers.
I consider BADI as good practice and not a workaround, otherwise why SAP will publish its use ?
However , decision is yours to use RLLI2100 or BADI considering process-people environment.
Regards,
Ajay
