Got the URL working.  Thank you

I set the ||link|| at the domain level however it still shows in some 
customers with out the link.  How do I know which customers set the friends 
message up without the ||link|| ?   I don't have the time to check them all.

FWIW I noticed that if I do not start t he friends message with a carriage 
return the first paragraph will not show up in the challenge message.  Not 
sure when that started or how that happened.

Also can we customize the mail.domain.net:7080 cgi .....   page

>
>
>
>
> On Tuesday 01/02/2011 at 7:46 am, surgemailHIDDEN@etwinsite.com wrote:
>> A few questions.
>>
>> We have been using the friends system for a long time, when you had to 
>> reply to the message to be added to the wite list.  Now that the friends 
>> uses a link to be added, I find 2 problems.
>>
>> First the link has our domain name but not the "mail" in the link.  Thus 
>> the link does not work.  Where does the link pick up that server name?  I 
>> obviously need to add the server name to the domain.
>>
>>
>
> You can specify at a domain level
>      FRIENDS_URL
> or
>      g_friends_url
> (if it's the same for all domains)
>
> or if neither of those it wil use the domain level setting 'url_host' 
> which you might which to set anyway.
>
> You can test the results using:
>      tellmail friends_urlHIDDEN@omain.name
> to see what url it will use.
>>
>>
>>
>> Second issue.  All the messages from existing users are not changed to 
>> have the ||Link|| added.  So now the reply message says in the subject 
>> says to click on the link which does not appear in the message.  (Unless 
>> I manually add it)  How do I change all the individual messages of my 
>> customers to reflect this link.  I really don't wish to do this manually.
>>
>>
>
>
> For global/domain you must add this manually if you have tailored 
> messages.
>
> For users messages it uses a different template file, so they will get the 
> domain/global default message unless/until they go back into their 
> settings and re setup a friends message.  We thought this was the best 
> approach as simply 'tacking on' the link into an existing message would 
> not make it 'make sense' since it clearly has to say something different 
> now.  Sorry this isn't ideal but we thought it was the lesser of two bad 
> options.
>
>      ChrisP.
>
>>
>>
>> Thanks in advance
>>
>>
>
>
>
>