Hi,
Just set your messages rules correctly. For example: Where the TO line
contain OR the CC line contain discuss-list@opensrs, move to Folder.
Regards,
Steve
_____________________________________________
Steve Poirier - [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Inet Technologies inc - http://www.inet-technologies.com
----- Original Message -----
From: Michael L. Dean <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: Charles Daminato <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; Jon Ribbens
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Cc: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Thursday, August 24, 2000 4:04 PM
Subject: Re: OpenSRS - confusion reigns
> I have a general request: a lot of petty conversation is taking place
that
> I can't screen out because you guys are addressing messages to a specific
> person, and then ccing the discuss-list. So my message rules put your
often
> trite and repetitive comments in my main folder where it distracts me from
> more important issues. Please address the to as the list, and cc the
> individual, or just address the individual and leave the rest of us out of
> this crap.
> From: "Charles Daminato" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: "Jon Ribbens" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Cc: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Sent: Thursday, August 24, 2000 12:33 PM
> Subject: Re: OpenSRS - confusion reigns
>
>
> > Again, read through :) (and thank you Ross for your previous
response...)
> >
> > Charles Daminato
> > OpenSRS Support Manager
> > [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >
> > On Thu, 24 Aug 2000, Jon Ribbens wrote:
> >
> > > Many thanks for your response.
> > >
> > > Charles Daminato <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > > I'm using the assumption that you're using the QuickStart (Reseller
> Web
> > > > Interface) method for registering domain names...
> > >
> > > We're using both. There doesn't really appear to be any difference
> > > between the two, except that we can use some of the client-side stuff
as
> > > library routines in the future.
> > >
> >
> > Client management is all handled via the RWI but with the scripts you
can
> > do the following:
> >
> > - Multiple domain registrations - bulk and related TLDs
> > - Multiple transfers
> > - Customizations - readily configurable (custom nameservers, tech
contact
> > information) OR if you prefer ...:
> > - register.cgi - this allows ALL the contacts to be the same BUT it has
no
> > hooks for CC payments, and it ignores the "Process Orders Immediately"
> > directive set in the RWI
> >
> > register.cgi is meant as a raw tool used for domain registrations - it
> > uses a 'register_domain' command instead of a 'sw_register' command -
the
> > difference being register_domain is used for singular registrations and
is
> > setup by default to has "org, admin, tech, billing" into the same
> > registration string. You CAN pass all these values into sw_register (if
> > you actually look at the code, org=>admin for sw_register - you can
break
> > this up)
> >
> > Not exactly elegant - but the functionality is there. In the future we
> > can likely make this configurable via OpenSRS.conf and have little
> > customizations necessary for the client code.
> >
> > > > The web based interface is meant to be limited for registrations -
> it's
> > > > a stop-gap to enable you to register domains while you get the
scripts
> > > > up and running (which is our MUCH preferred method of domain
> registration).
> > >
> > > Then there is no way at all of editing all the information associated
> with
> > > an order, except writing a load of code? (We have already installed
the
> cgis.
> > > They don't provide order management that I can see. There's lots of
> stuff
> > > only the resellers.opensrs.net pages do.)
> > >
> >
> > See above :)
> >
> > > > We've left the model open for whatever you wish to impose on your
> > > > customers - it's left wide open ... The way it's setup allows the
> > > > greatest number of iterations to allow the RSP to have as much
control
> as
> > > > they want, and give the end user as much control as you wish them to
> have
> > > > as well.
> > >
> > > Yes, I said I liked it technically ;-). It's just confusing because
you
> > > can register two domains using the same username and password, and
they
> > > won't be linked unless you mention the first domain when registering
the
> > > second.
> > >
> >
> > Yes - this should be made more clear - we hope that through doing the
RITE
> > Testing this becomes more apparent to the Reseller - we can't give away
> > ALL our secrets, can we? :)
> >
> > > > Yes, Change Ownership of Domain is somewhat ambiguous. The subtext
> DOES
> > > > say "You may create a new profile for this domain or move it to a
> > > > different profile you own" I agree that instructions for doing so
> aren't
> > > > well articulated. We're working on an FAQ for each specific
interface
> to
> > > > help with common questions (i.e. what does "Change Ownership of
> Domain"
> > > > mean, and "How do move domains into/away from other profiles").
> > >
> > > But why bother with all these FAQs? Why not put a single paragraph on
> the
> > > web page itself saying what it will do? This is easier and much more
> > > convenient for the user.
> > >
> >
> > FAQs are there to assist users who also run into Management Interfaces
> > 'based' on our default but are massively customized by the RSP - since
you
> > can alter the scripts anyway you want (including removing functionality
> > you don't want the end user to have) FAQs are the best generic source
for
> > information as they're controlled by us - AND if there's any updates to
> > public docs we can change them once, instead of having to notify xxx
RSPs
> > to update their sites...
> >
> > > > RCU's *are* used by the site - as well as Dollar amounts. One RCU
is
> a
> > > > domain transaction (i.e. transfer, renewal, new registration)
> > >
> > > Yes, I know that this is theoretically the idea, but RCUs are not
> visible
> > > anywhere in the system that I can see. The payment information page
> shows
> > > you dollars. I'm not sure why you want to mess around with 'RCUs'
anyway
> > > since all it does is cause problems (like with the current $6.75
> transfer
> > > promo).
> > >
> >
> > As Ross said before. And I shudder at the thought of him be CFO :)
> >
> > > > As an aside - you should have seen this thing in January when we
first
> > > > released it *grin*
> > >
> > > I'm sure it's come on in leaps and bounds ;-).
> > >
> > > Cheers
> > >
> > >
> > > Jon
> > >
> >
> >
>
>
