fpCGI failure, part 2

[Nancy Palmquist]

Bruce,

I do not say that onegate is not an excellent tool.  It has features not found 
in fpCGI and you are right it is structured somewhat differently, but in many 
ways the same.

I was able adjust programming to onegate version without too much trouble.

But I found that both have the same basic flow and require the same tedious 
attention to detail.

Both need the environment clearly defined, since nothing else is assumed.

Both need a robust filePro process that has taken into account all crash issues 
and is running flawlessly.

I would say that I have used onegate for the last setups I have done, because it 
was the customer's choice.

In one case, we installed onegate for features unavailable in fpCGI.  Now the 
customer runs both onegate and fpCGI on the same servers.  BTW - the feature we 
needed was the ability to receive a text field - a special form field that would 
allow for free form text.  fpCGI would not handle it properly, onegate does.

There were also more options for firewall setups in onegate.  It could allow a 
very narrow network of computers to interact without too much problem.  That has 
not been helpful to us, but I can see the potential in that.

Mark - don't get your shorts in a bunch.  You know I love Onegate, but I just 
want to be fair and offer suggestions that the customer can use to solve his 
problem.  I hate answers that go like this:

Problem:  My pants are dirty.

Solution: Buy new pants.

Obviously, wash the pants might be a more efficient solution, but we all know 
Buy New Pants could also be a solution, just not a great one.

Nancy


-- 
Nancy Palmquist 		MOS & filePro Training Available
Virtual Software Systems	Web Based Training and Consulting	
PHONE: (412) 835-9417		   Web site:  http://www.vss3.com