great suggestion, unfortunately Bill Gates in his infinite mediocrity did
not provide that alternative in Outlook espress
----- Original Message -----
From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Michael L. Dean" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Cc: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Thursday, August 24, 2000 1:59 PM
Subject: Re: OpenSRS - confusion reigns
> 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
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
>
>
