Frontpage access disabled 28/08

[#1]

steed why don't you move your site to the home pages Server? 
You sed: "I don't really use any of the Frontpage extensions now and just use Frontpage as an HTML editor"
You can get Free HTML editors or you can continue using Frontpage editor to build your site with, but you will need to use a FTP client such as FileZilla Client what is not bad and is Free, to upload your files to the home pages Server, you can not use Frontpage to upload to the home pages Server.

[#2]

Quote from: Midnight

steed why don't you move your site to the home pages Server?

It is because the websites have been established using the Frontpage web addresses for 8 years, so all the (external) internet links are pointed to various pages of the websites on the Frontpage server.
I could transfer the websites onto the home pages Server if there were only a couple of the Frontpage web addresses referenced, and set up a redirect, but numerous external websites have links to my websites that are to specific pages within these websites.

[#3]

@steed, it certainly wouldn't do you any harm to transfer a copy of your site to the Homepages server anyway. Once you've done this, I could look at the possibility of us setting up redirects at this side although I can't promise anything.

[#4]

This Frontpage problem is causing me many problems and for it to take a week to fix (and not fixed yet) worries me about the competence of the people you are using !!!.
I have only stuck with The frontpage server for about 6 years now because when I built my genealogy website I used some of the extensions. The big problem is the Plus Nets use of FP rather than WWW for the address which means if I were to change it to the normal servers everyone who has set up links to the specifics on pages over the past 6 years will have broken links.  Why oh why did Plus Net set up the FP address I have never seen it elsewhere.
If you can set up some type of internal linkage for transferring all addresses from FP to WWW it would mean we could all transfer over to the normal servers and you could shutdown the Frontpage ones.  Otherwise get them fixed and keep them working properly. My sole reason for persisting with Plus Net is the FRONTPAGE SERVER FP ADDRESS and consideration for all those using my site, otherwise I would have ditched PN years ago. Struggling with a broadband speed of 1.7 Mb sec and only 1.2 Km from my exchange it's just not good enough, and this current problem is the last straw.

[#5]

Quote from: neepdocker

This Frontpage problem is causing me many problems and for it to take a week to fix (and not fixed yet) worries me about the competence of the people you are using !!!.

I'm not sure what you mean by that tbh. The people who have been looking into the recent problem are our Network Operations Team i.e. the same people who built the platform in the first place.

Quote

I have only stuck with The frontpage server for about 6 years now because when I built my genealogy website I used some of the extensions. The big problem is the Plus Nets use of FP rather than WWW for the address which means if I were to change it to the normal servers everyone who has set up links to the specifics on pages over the past 6 years will have broken links.  Why oh why did Plus Net set up the FP address I have never seen it elsewhere.

Because the www. subdomain is reserved for our Homepages server space. Just like with the CGI platform, we chose to use a different subdomain for the Frontpage server space.

Quote

If you can set up some type of internal linkage for transferring all addresses from FP to WWW it would mean we could all transfer over to the normal servers and you could shutdown the Frontpage ones.  Otherwise get them fixed and keep them working properly. My sole reason for persisting with Plus Net is the FRONTPAGE SERVER FP ADDRESS and consideration for all those using my site, otherwise I would have ditched PN years ago.

Using proprietary standards for your web page design is something I would suggest you steer away from regardless. I wonder how many other ISPs offer frontpage hosting, I'd be surprised if it was many? We will try to minimise disruption, but if I'm completely honest there's a high possibility that we'll need to ask customers to move their sites to alternative server space, potentially without Frontpage extensions installed.

Quote

Struggling with a broadband speed of 1.7 Mb sec and only 1.2 Km from my exchange it's just not good enough, and this current problem is the last straw.

You're sure you're that close, BT Wholesale's DSL checker suggests that you should expect speeds of circa 1Mbps on your line due to its length. You do realise that your line may be routed 'around the houses' so to speak and isn't necessarily as the crow flies?

[#6]

It was that choice of using FP instead of WWW that has led to the potential problems that your Frontpage users now face i.e. in breaking all links that have been made to our sites. Also losing all the revenue from the likes of Google Adsence ads on our sites which help cover the £20ish charge to pay per month  for the broadband / webspace. So it is the loss of the FP that worries me most and as I say if I do lose it I will move my website elsewhere. I do not need frontpage extensions any more. I already have set up a mirror site elsewhere in anticipation of this. So it will just be a matter of moving to another ISP. So let's see if PN can fix their problem - SOON!!
My 1.2 Km was the figure from a line test by a BT Engineer, I appreciate that they do not run lines in a direct straight line from everyone's house to the exchange 

[#7]

Quote from: neepdocker

This Frontpage problem is causing me many problems and for it to take a week to fix (and not fixed yet) worries me about the competence of the people you are using !!!.

So are Microsoft incompetent because they are not fixing problems in Windows 3.1, Windows 95, Windows 98, ...?
Frontpage is obsolete (that's Frontpage itself, not just the PN servers) - it was inevitable that once Microsoft stopped supporting it there would come a day when a problem meant usage had to be restricted. Anyone who was not planning for that eventuality was being very short-sighted. Why do you think some of us kept kicking about ccgi not being upgraded to php 5, and took up the offer of the PAYH trial?

[#8]

The problem is not a problem with the Frontpage software which is , I agree dated and now not supported by Microsoft, but with the use of Frontpage Servers using FP.websitename rather than WWW.websitename which I , in retrospect, wish I had never allowed my website to be placed on. I should have dropped the use of the Frontpage ext. and placed it on the normal servers. However that is now what  has been brought to a head by the fact PN and their server problem does not allow me to update the site. This is not a good position to be in for anyone with an active website.

[#9]

Hi
Just joined this group because of PN's inability to say how, or when or if they are going to restart their FrontPage Server upload cability again.
I can understand them having a problem, but not their lack of commitment to a resolution.
I understand that this is a problem with the FrontPage Server rather than FrontPage itself. I was not aware that MS had withdrawn any support for FrontPage Server. hence any reference to this seems to be misplaced.
My main gripe is that it looks as if PN have no contingency plan or workaround to this. Furthermore it is not giving its customers and basis for making a decision as to whether it is able to competently deliver the service which it claims to provide.
As there is no evidence that ISP around the world are discontinuing FPServer support then presumably this is a PlusNet rather than an MS problem.
If Plus Net do not provide a service for uploading my daily changes which I normally make to our website soon then I will have to reluctantly move my web hosting elsewhere. Maybe PlusNet is good as an ISP for Broadband Access but poor as an ISP for hosting. Certainly it does not seem to be showing any signs of excellence in customer support in this area at the moment.
I look forward to at least some clear statement from PlusNet as to what their customers should do in this situation.
Best regards
Rod

[#10]

FrontPage 2003 

[#11]

I don't think the issue is whether Microsoft supports an authoring package called FrontPage,  isn't it rather whether they support FrontPage server side extensions?
I know the answer to the first is no.
I don't know what the answer to the second is.
However, I am using Microsoft Expression Web which is a current Microsoft application.
One publishing option it offers is "to a remote server supporting Front Page Sserver Extensions" and, as far as I can make out, it is only by publishing in this way that some of Expression Web's features can be used.
This would suggest to me that Microsoft still regard this as a current system.
dick:quote

[#12]

Springfield
That's my understanding as well. The product used at the client side is not the issue. I also have websites where I use ExpressionWeb 3 and this uses FrontPage Server Extensions to synchronise and upload.
I think that the main problem is that no-one seems to be providing any clear guidance to clients about what the problem is and the time scale for resolution.
The issue seems to be whether PN are supporting FrontPage Server Extensions and whether their clients who wish to have a reliable service and a committed hosting company need to move elsewhere.

Regards
Rod

[#13]

I think at the end of the day PlusNet want to ditch the Frontpage server service all together.
And since it will probably only effect around 500 people I don't think if all these left PlusNet it would impact on their business too much.
Since BT took over they have moved their business model and all the features that were very attractive to PlusNet in the past, and have slowly eroded them away (or changed them to attract joe bloggs like all the other big ISPs trying to attract new customers).
I cannot see that the end of the product life-cycle is the only reason to discontinue the service. If no new service (software) updates are being released just how much maintenance would be needed to keep the existing arrangements in place?
Couldn't PlusNet just leave the Frontpage server service running for the people that still use it?
Or is it just not cost effective enough?
It probably costs PlusNet too much to maintain the Frontpage service in relation to the number of users, and like most businesses would sooner write it off and get people either to transfer to another (more expensive) service, or take the lost revenue from users that leave because in the end it is still cheaper than trying to keep the Frontpage service going.

[#14]

Just how much of the FP server side functionality is there that can't be replaced by another - preferably non-proprietary technology such as php - or the simple use of Server Side Includes ?
i.e what is the scale of the problem ?.
I was advised many years ago not to use FP and especially not use it server side functionality and I'm glad i heeded that advice.

[#15]

The main problem is that Plusnet use Linux servers.
Frontpage Extensions for Linux were End of Lifed on June 30th 2006.  Microsoft removed any support and maintenance on them.
This means that if any vulnerability is found in them, it will never be fixed.  This means that Plusnet then need to devote additional 'security' to the Frontpage boxes.  As time goes on, the maintenance of these boxes becomes increasingly difficult.
The latest maintenance was to disable direct access because of a vulnerability found in the software running on the servers.  See paragraph 3 as to what will happen. This leaves Plusnet in an unenviable position:
1.  Leave the platform in place, with inherant security vulnerability and look at a possible repeat of the Email break-in (or worse)
2.  Provision Frontpage Server Extensions 2003, based upon Windows servers and IIS.  This opens a whole host of interoperability, security and cost implications.
3.  Retire the platform gracefully.
IMO, Option 3 is the only decent long-term solution, and what I expect to hear an announcement on soon.  FP Extensions for Linux have not been developed for 5 years and should be dragged out, shot and buried as fast as possible.
B.