Chanel allowd groups

[VPope]

Is there any way to set a channel to allow people of a certain group to access it ,

I have been playing around with channel group permissions but these only apply once you are IN the channel, i have found "channel client permisions" which you can use for this but it involves configuring each user individually.

Does anyone know of a way to simply specify sertain groups as being able to join a given channel ? Or to set channels to allow certain groups ?

[Stefan1200]

For every channel you set in the "channel rights" the "Needed channel join power".

Now you switch to "server groups" and set for every group the "Channel join power".

Example:
Channel one has a "Needed channel join power" of 10.
Channel two has a "Needed channel join power" of 20.

Now you have three server groups.
Group one has a "Channel join power" of 15.
Group two has a "Channel join power" of 30.
Group three has a "Channel join power" of 50.

Members of Group one only can join Channel one, but not Channel two.
Members of the groups Group two and Group three can join both channels.

[VPope]

This would imply a hierarchical system ,im my case i need several groups independent of one another

[Coaleh]

I also have this problem. How many people actually use a hierarchy anyway?

In other words - something like the Channel Client Permissions page, but with Groups, rather than clients.

[VPope]

I also have this problem. How many people actually use a hierarchy anyway?

In other words - something like the Channel Client Permissions page, but with Groups, rather than clients.

Exactly , from what i can deduce the permissions for this exist in client channel permissions , however it does not seem possible to tie client channel permissions to a group.

[Chillmaster]

Thx for explaining

[djnoob]

Right. They have completely based it on heierarchy. It would have been much better if they simply had check boxes you could just say which groups have access to which channels. It would have been so much easier that way.

The only way I think you could do what you're talking about would be to put a password on the channel and then give the password to the people you want to have access to those channels.

[TrentonSODMG]

Right. They have completely based it on heierarchy. It would have been much better if they simply had check boxes you could just say which groups have access to which channels. It would have been so much easier that way.

The only way I think you could do what you're talking about would be to put a password on the channel and then give the password to the people you want to have access to those channels.

Thats the old fashion way. There are servers where people will be in and out of a group. Which going to require the psswd to be change and having to tell everyone in the group what the new psswd is. On other VOIP clients. Its easy as 1 2 3 to make a channel to be part of a group. Its going to be hard for people to switch because of these type of things...

[TerraX]

Right. They have completely based it on heierarchy. It would have been much better if they simply had check boxes you could just say which groups have access to which channels. It would have been so much easier that way.

I agree with you. I was very disappointed as I found out about this s*** hierachy based system because it's very complicated and needs a lot of work to config and finetune properly.

But at the end it does not solve the f***** common problem of handling independent groups in private seperated and shared public areas of the server like many community servers might need to do so. Instead of that, you have to define dependencies where no such are - yeah! Therefore we needed groups - Yeah!

At some points - looking at the right management screens, I had the strong feeling that someone took all possible ideas and threw it in one pot - regardless whether it would make sense or not. At least the screens are looking like that.

I hoped for a true group/channel based access system not that hierarchy mix of hell we got that in fact does not solve the security issues of the past.