Well, as far as U-com, yes. But X already knows the difference between regular users, opers, and CService helpers/admins.
X could pass an arg to the servers to change the hostname to "*@helper.cservice.undernet.org", "*@admin.cservice", "*@oper.undernet.org", etc, based on how X views the user's status (i.e. a 313 gets you @oper, and the appropriate global access levels in X get you the cservice hosts). No offense, but User-Com (and Doc-Com, Script-Com, and the other -Com's that have in the past existed) aren't in the same "official"-ness realm as opers and CService. So maybe it's best to limit the hostnames to opers, cs-helpers, cs-admins, and users. Then we eliminate that pesky "is he or isnt he an official CService representative" crap. -j -----Original Message----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Valcor Sent: Tuesday, April 02, 2002 2:27 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [Coder-Com] Ideas >> > Another thing is: why do you actually use >> > <currentident>@<AC-id>.users.undernet.org and not > <AC-id>@users.undernet.org >> > ? For opers it might become <AC-id>@opers.undernet.org. >> >> Either way is acceptable, it's just the way that it was coded when it was >> submitted. > Undernet Channel Serivce = *@<username>.cservice.undernet.org > Undernet User Committee = *@<username>.user-com.undernet.org > Etc... > I think this will be cool too..it's just another idea about that. But then you have to have some kind of system to register user-com members apart from cservice members... and then you also have to consider the issue that some people work in both areas. User-com doesn't have any username registration systems... so that'd maybe have to be made just to fit this idea. I think the current idea of *@<username>.users.undernet.org is fine. -- Valcor
