User not known
Your message reads (in part):
Received: from walnut.iea-software.com (unverified [22.214.171.124]) by webserver.netsis.it
(EMWAC SMTPRS 0.83) with SMTP id <B0000171536@webserver.netsis.it>
Thu, 17 Sep 1998 02:05:59 +0200
Received: from walnut.iea-software.com (walnut.iea-software.com [126.96.36.199]) by walnut.iea-software.com (NTMail 4.00.0020/NT6651.00.c89adb95) with ESMTP id za000746 for <firstname.lastname@example.org> Wed, 16 Sep 1998 16:41:11 +0100
Received: from [188.8.131.52] by walnut.iea-software.com (NTMail 4.00.0020/NT6651.00.c89adb95) with ESMTP id vmhaaaaa for <email@example.com> Wed, 16 Sep 1998 16:41:07 +0100
Received: from calypso (aquarius.com.au [184.108.40.206])
by triton.aquarius.com.au (2.5 Build 2639 (Berkeley 8.8.6)/8.8.4) with SMTP
id JAA00771 for <firstname.lastname@example.org> Thu, 17 Sep 1998 09:46:31 +1000
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.5 (32)
Date: Thu, 17 Sep 1998 09:46:31 +1000
To: "email@example.com" <firstname.lastname@example.org>
From: Glen Harvy <email@example.com>
Subject: Billing Consolidations......
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
X-ListMember: firstname.lastname@example.org [email@example.com]
I am using v 2.2.23.
If I want the Billing Period to start on the 15th, do I set the Expire Date
to the 14th of the following month or the 15th?
With regard to your last comment, the invoices for non Credit Cards were
generated correctly even though the Expire dates are set to the 15th.
At 22:50 14/09/98 -0700, you wrote:
>Glen Harvy wrote:
>> I charge my customers as at the 15th monthly. That is, for the period
>> starting at 0000 on the 15th and until 2359 on the 14th of the month.
>> I have my accounts set to expire on 09/15/98 on the Billing cycle in the
>> I ran Call Consolidation on the 15th expecting the call data from 08/15/98
>> to 09/14/98 to be consolidated and placed in the History table. The
>> previous time I ran Call Consolidation was on 15th August.
>> To explain my problem and as an example, on 09/14/98, one of our customers
>> record showed TIME ON from 08/15/98 to 09/15/98 as 53 hours. After Call
>> Consolidation on 09/15/98, TIME ON was calculated by Emerald for the same
>> period as 27 hours.
>> What APPEARS to have happened is the data from the period prior to 08/31/98
>> has been consolidated. The data from 09/01/98 remains in the Time On
>> When I ran call consolidation I entered 09/15/98 as the Invoice Date.
>> Examining the Call History for the above example customer, the Start Date
>> shows 08/15/98 and the time is 45 hours.
>Things sounds like the old behavior of Emerald 2.1. It consolidated
>incorrectly based on month boundaries, rather than on the actually
>cycle. Emerald 2.2 corrects this problem and correctly consolidated on
>the bondaries like you expect. One note, you may need to consolidate
>on the next day (the 16th) rather than on the 15th, since the billing
>cycle doesn't complete until after the 15th.
>Dale E. Reed Jr. (firstname.lastname@example.org)
> IEA Software, Inc. | RadiusNT, Emerald, and NT FAQs
> Internet Solutions for Today | http://www.iea-software.com
AQUARIUS Communications for all your Internet<>Fidonet needs
<>Full ISP services<>FrontDoor Commercial<>TransX Internet/FTSC Mailer
http://www.aquarius.com.au <> mailto:email@example.com