LSTOWN-L Archives

LISTSERV List Owners' Forum

LSTOWN-L

Options: Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Show All Mail Headers

Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Lee Silverman <[log in to unmask]>
Thu, 20 Jul 1995 12:51:49 -0400
text/plain (61 lines)
At 12:10 PM 7/20/95, Geert K. Marien wrote:
 
>       Current:      [log in to unmask]
>                 and [log in to unmask]    are no the same.
>
>       New:          [log in to unmask]
>                 and [log in to unmask]    are equivalent.
>              So is: [log in to unmask]
>            But not: [log in to unmask]
>
 
        A slightly more flexible way to do that would be
send=private,2
which means that the last two tokens of the domain name have to match.  In
this scheme:
        [log in to unmask]
    and [log in to unmask]
 
are the same.  Under send=private,3 they would be considered different,
because geo and cs don't match.
 
        It might also be useful to allow any user in a given domain to
post, though I'm not sure exactly how I would do this given the current
setup.
 
        It might be a *major* change in listserv, but a lot of the
flexibilty that we're asking for would be easier to implement if there were
seperate lists maintained of who received posts to a given list and who was
allowed to send posts to the list.  This would simplify the implementation
of moderated lists, make NOMAIL a no-brainer option, and would allow people
who receive lists via netnews to still post with one simple operation.
 
New keywords might be:
 
READ listname Joe User
POST listname Joe User
SUBSCRIBE listname Joe User (which would now have the same effect as
issueing both of these requests).
 
        Varied permissions could be set in the header keywords about who
can signup to post and who can signup to read.
 
        If such a scheme were implemented, then a listowner could issue a
command like, for example
 
ADD POST *@domain.edu
ADD POST user1@*.domain.edu
 
and achieve exactly the kind of flexibility that we're discussing.  Filters
might also be written to allow people at .com sites to read but not post to
a list.  The possibilities are endless.  Obviously, wildcards would be
rejected for an ADD READ command, and a simple ADD command without READ or
POST would have the same effect that it does now.
 
Then again, I'm not the person who'd have to code that into listserv... :-)
 
 
 
Lee Silverman     [log in to unmask]      http://www.netspace.org/users/lee/
         Live each day as if your life had just begun.  --  Goethe

ATOM RSS1 RSS2