| | |||
| | | ||
| | | ||
| | | ||
| | | ||
| | | ||
| | | ||
| | | ||
| | | ||
| | | ||
| | | ||
| | | ||
| | | ||
| | | ||
| | | ||
| | | ||
| | | ||
| | | ||
| | | ||
| | | ||
| | | ||
| | | ||
| | | ||
| | | | |
| Subwebs are one of those things that don't work 100% the way they would if you were running on a single webserver serving your data off of the C drive. If, for instance, you tried to change the permissions to turn off "use same permissions as top level web", that would probably cause the Subweb issues to occur. In this case, we were able to get your Subweb working by recreating it (Convert to folder and back to subweb). It's a brute force solution, but it rectifies all of the permissions settings that are unique to our environment and gets the site up and running again. Our Windows architecture is unique to our environment, but a significant majority of the FrontPage functionality works without a hitch. Some functionality (subwebs, editable regions) work with some pecularities. If you are still experiencing issues, please either reply to this email, or call us at 877-440-7872, and make reference to the above ticket number. We do apologize for any inconvience, as we do appreciate your business. Thanks Tanya - Purehost Technical Specialist | |||
| | | ||
| | | ||
| | | ||
| | | ||
| | | ||
| | | ||
| | | ||
| | | ||
| | | ||
| | | | |
| We have changed the three subwebs to use the same permissions as the parent web. It appears that you had changed it to use unique permissions for each subweb. Please be advised, THIS WILL NOT WORK IN OUR HOSTING ENVIRONMENT. Please check. If you are still experiencing issues, please either reply to this email, or call us at 877-440-7872, and make reference to the above ticket number. We do apologize for any inconvience, as we do appreciate your business. Thanks Tanya - Purehost Technical Specialist | |||
| | | | |
| From a previous email either from Raylaeonard or John Parker told me of the unique nature - somewhat - of how the systems are set up. It sounded good for Frontpage 2000 / IIS5 / Server2000 environments, but not for Server2003 / IIS6 / FPSE2002. Judging from the basic terminology used in the explanation it sounded like the system is trying to emulate an application pool approach (which is BUILT in to server2003 / and FPSE2002). I still don't understand why you guys just don't setup each account in it's own garden - this would allow all FP features and security to be implemented. On Mon, 01 May 2006 15:28 , support@purehost-inc.com sent: >Hello Don, > > >We have changed the three subwebs to use the same permissions as the parent web. It appears that you had changed it to use unique permissions for each subweb. Please be advised, THIS WILL NOT WORK IN OUR HOSTING ENVIRONMENT. Please check. > > >If you are still experiencing issues, please either reply to this email, or call us at 877-440-7872, and make reference to the above ticket number. > > >We do apologize for any inconvience, as we do appreciate your business. > > >Thanks > > >Tanya - Purehost Technical Specialist | |||
| | | | |
| WE could used the new WS FTP versions of their software which has Frontpage-safe filtering code so as not to obliterate Front-Page created pages such as the _folders and files. But, I would rather that they student editors use FP as the main pub and backup client. On Mon, 01 May 2006 15:28 , support@purehost-inc.com sent: >Hello Don, > > >We have changed the three subwebs to use the same permissions as the parent web. It appears that you had changed it to use unique permissions for each subweb. Please be advised, THIS WILL NOT WORK IN OUR HOSTING ENVIRONMENT. Please check. > > >If you are still experiencing issues, please either reply to this email, or call us at 877-440-7872, and make reference to the above ticket number. > > >We do apologize for any inconvience, as we do appreciate your business. > > >Thanks > > >Tanya - Purehost Technical Specialist | |||
| | | ||
| | | ||
| | | ||
| | | ||
| | | ||
| | | ||
| | | ||
| | | ||
| | | ||
| | | ||
| | | ||
| | | | |
| In our environment, we don't have the ability to support subwebs edited by subusers. We've looked at a variety of ways of supporting it, but it's not able to be supported in our environment. The only account able to edit a page in FrontPage is the main account. It's unfortunate, but it's a necessity at this point. Using a web garden wouldn't work in our environment (a web garden is a number of processes on one server, not a number of servers). We've looked at moving to web farms, but it's not a perfectly simple solution. There are a number of considerations (how it interplays with our network hardware and network storage, for one). We do apologize for any inconvience, as we do appreciate your business. We would love nothing more that to be able to accomodate you on this, but this is not something we will be implementing right now. But possibly (might) in the future but that is several months away. If you are still experiencing issues, please either reply to this email, or call us at 877-440-7872, and make reference to the above ticket number. We do apologize for any inconvience, as we do appreciate your business. Thanks Tanya - Purehost Technical Specialist | |||
| | | | |
| If "your environment" was Server2003 and IIS6 and not some extra UNIX crap on top of it all - just for authentication, what a waste of brain power - then subwebs would most certainly work properly; they would also be more secure than your current setups, there is no arguing that point (the old adage that if the Frontpage Extensions break then there can be security issues - yeah maybe in IIS4!). There is no "variety of ways", there is only the Microsoft way if you want to use Microsoft product. Remember your 2 big DOS attacks in December '05, all over digg.com and slash-dot BTW? IF your environment had been set up the way Microsoft suggested back in June last year (during the start of the Server 2003 Partnership Certification process), your security issues of the have been zero in December! This is clearly the reason that you will not Server2003 Certified Partnership with Microsoft any time soon, at least not for a few months, right? Perhaps you will benefit from Microsoft ISA Servers in the near future? http://www.microsoft.com/isaserver/default.mspx Something to seriously discuss and think about. Frontpage2002 is for concurrent collaboration between multiple users and subwebs. This constant Subweb creation and breaking issue probably has to be the biggest joke ever played on a customer. Hearing this news this late is ludicrous and I deserve at least 3 months credit applied for all the crap I have had to endure over the last 2.5 years (80% related to subweb issues, the other due to roles.ini and FTP account changes made internally and then "fixed" 72 hours later - that should only take 4 minutes to fix, and has only taken minutes a few documented times), and basically mis-information I have from many of the LevelOne and Two tech staff - blaming things like the use of FTP is what is breaking extensions - OMG get off that one, even the MVP's at Microsoft are on to that loose interpretation! If you don't know by now what SPECIFICALLY using ftp will break in the way of FPSE, then find another line of work. Basically, recalculating hyperlinks fixes the "break" of extensions that ftp can cause - since most ftp clients don't show the _files with out a deliberate change in program preferences. Frontpage2002 is for concurrent collaboration between multiple users and subwebs. I have not heard of any other webhosting company advertising the implementation of Front Page 2002 extensions for their customers and NOT making fully sure that they work utterly completely (with the exception of GoDaddy.com being slow to improve in the hosting business, but at least they are TAKING Microsoft's advice and letting Server2003 and IIS6 do the work they were designed to do). You really seriously need to put this warning on the Purehost.com website right at the top of the Front Page page in BOLD BANNER sty...oh, I'm sorry, not Banner - that's a Frontpage thing, sorry. You can't use the Frontpage Banners, because of your "environment". To say, "Frontpage subwebs don't work quite the way they would as if they were on a single machine on the C: drive" is BULLSHITE and is just one of the many laughable excuses thrown to me. The subwebs would work EXACTLY that way IF they were served in the PROPER environment designed by MICROSOFT (and I rarely think of MS being the Kings of all that is computing). Endurance International - your parent company - just bought ReadyHosting.com - are their servers to be configured in the same way as Purehost's? What a nightmare that would be. Frontpage2002 is for concurrent collaboration between multiple users and subwebs. As far as interplay with your hardware and network storage goes: I was told that your storage and servers are in different parts of the country. So what's the problem? Switch out the old crap and put in the blades. Get 'er done! Judging by the new (same template, however) Endurance International website and owners, changing out the old equipment for the new should be a drop in the bucket for you guys. So, what you are really trying to say (but, I can't figure out why you just say it) is that we should be collaborating with using Macromedia product? Is this what you are thinking? ALSO, you are blocking ip addresses at the sign-on dialogue of Frontpage at the public address range 208.54.xxx.xxx (possibly port 80, but who knows, as your "environment" is so different) and you need to stop doing that - you are cutting off alot of editing possibilities from a large range of customers needing access from FedEx/Kinkos locations - and any other company using NAT'd routers in the 208.54.xxx.xxx range - that is a HUGE friggin' range, too!. This has been verified through a forced-ip change, after the change then I COULD sign-in using the FP client. Frontpage2002 is for concurrent collaboration between multiple users and subwebs. On Wed, 03 May 2006 13:34 , support@purehost-inc.com sent: >Hello Don, > > >In our environment, we don't have the ability to support subwebs edited by subusers. We've looked at a variety of ways of supporting it, but it's not able to be supported in our environment. The only account able to edit a page in FrontPage is the main account. It's unfortunate, but it's a necessity at this point. > > >Using a web garden wouldn't work in our environment (a web garden is a number of processes on one server, not a number of servers). We've looked at moving to web farms, but it's not a perfectly simple solution. There are a number of considerations (how it interplays with our network hardware and network storage, for one). > > >We do apologize for any inconvenience, as we do appreciate your business. We would love nothing more that to be able to accommodate you on this, but this is not something we will be implementing right now. But possibly (might) in the future but that is several months away. > > >If you are still experiencing issues, please either reply to this email, or call us at 877-440-7872, and make reference to the above ticket number. > > >We do apologize for any inconvenience, as we do appreciate your business. > > >Thanks > > >Tanya - Purehost Technical Specialist | |||
| | | | |
| Please allow all traffic from that range to punch through - they use NAT'd routers at hat location, not all, but at least that location. At any rate, ip blocking or filtering is clearly occurring at the www.yourhostingaccount.com router and it needs to stop. On Wed, 03 May 2006 13:34 , support@purehost-inc.com sent: >Hello Don, > > >In our environment, we don't have the ability to support subwebs edited by subusers. We've looked at a variety of ways of supporting it, but it's not able to be supported in our environment. The only account able to edit a page in FrontPage is the main account. It's unfortunate, but it's a necessity at this point. > > >Using a web garden wouldn't work in our environment (a web garden is a number of processes on one server, not a number of servers). We've looked at moving to web farms, but it's not a perfectly simple solution. There are a number of considerations (how it interplays with our network hardware and network storage, for one). > > >We do apologize for any inconvience, as we do appreciate your business. We would love nothing more that to be able to accomodate you on this, but this is not something we will be implementing right now. But possibly (might) in the future but that is several months away. > > >If you are still experiencing issues, please either reply to this email, or call us at 877-440-7872, and make reference to the above ticket number. > > >We do apologize for any inconvience, as we do appreciate your business. > > >Thanks > > >Tanya - Purehost Technical Specialist | |||
| | | ||
| | | ||
| | | ||
Un-friggin-believa-BULL
This has been a PSA for anyone thinking of hosting services with PureHost, Bizland, ReadyHosting, and any other company owned by Endurance Intl.
Some names, and numbers are fake or changed to prevent anyone spamming or phreaking directly from info contained in this blog - no moochers, do your own research if you run with wolves!
