|Search found 4 matches
|Topic: AT&T ~ Cingular|
|Forum: General Questions and Announcements Posted: Mon Dec 11, 2006 5:58 pm Subject: AT&T ~ Cingular|
We, too, are experiencing problems with this carrier. I don't know when it started, as our records go back only about 30 days.
Has anyone found an 'answer' to this problem?
|Topic: Feature Request re: Failure messages to Postmaster|
|Forum: PageGate Support Posted: Thu Oct 20, 2005 12:09 pm Subject: Feature Request re: Failure messages to Postmaster|
|I read somewhere else here in the forums that Pagegate v5 is tentatively planned for release by end of 2005. I am looking forward to it!
I'd like to ask for a feature improvement - I hope it isn't too late. =D
When message transmission failures occur (Carrier retry limit, Recipient retry limit, empty groups, etc), and the Postmaster email is populated, the system sends the Postmaster an email with the subject line of 'Error Sending Page' and the body contains details of the failure. Would it be possible to:
1) Include the type of failure in the subject line, for example:
Subject: Error Sending Page - Carrier retry limit exceeded
2) Make the transmission of such failure messages configurable, ie provide a toggle for each individual message type so that they can be turned on or off. In our situation, I don't care about empty group messages, and would like to set the system so it won't send those at all. Or perhaps even a system-wide optional setting to ignore empty groups rather than treating them as an error condition.
An additional note:
Setting the Postmaster email address seems to be a bit buggy - I was unable to make one address stay populated in this field, so I had to resort to using another shorter email address instead. It would seem to accept the longer email address, but after Applying, leaving the GetMail/Settings screen and coming back, the field would be empty again. (For further info, you could contact me directly at email@example.com, but the preferred email address was 31 characters long, with the format of firstname.lastname@example.org, and the one it would accept was 20 characters long, with the format of email@example.com).
All in all, PageGate has been a great product!
Thank you for your time and consideration.
|Topic: AT&T TAP Update|
|Forum: General Questions and Announcements Posted: Thu Feb 05, 2004 4:10 am Subject: Late entry, but perhaps helpful|
|I realize this issue started months ago, but I thought I'd share what we found out.
More than one of our carriers stopped working when AT&T disconnected TAP. AT&T was unhelpful, of course. Cincinnati Bell Wireless, on the other hand, was able to come up with an alternative phone number than goes into THEIR Tap interface.... which transmits out over the AT&T network. A quick test confirmed it - we're able to send to all AT&T recipients again using their TAP interface.
OK, I'm not sure it's 'ethical' to piggyback through their interface, but it works...
|Topic: PageGate GetWeb / Direct Access db manipulation|
|Forum: Integration Related Questions Posted: Thu Feb 05, 2004 4:01 am Subject: PageGate GetWeb / Direct Access db manipulation|
We have set up some ASP.NET web pages that allow administrators throughout our Enterprise to add/edit/delete/report on users and groups, and manage group memberships.
Everything works fine - my only problem comes up when an administrator adds a user through the web page, which updates the JET database directly (not using the PageGate Administrator GUI).
If the administrator turns around and uses GetWeb to test that new user, the webgate.exe responds back with 'ERROR!!! No valid users specified.'
I believe this is because the webgate.usr list is not being updated. Is there a way to force PageGate to rewrite that file on demand? If not, how long will it take for PageGate to do so on its own? Or... does someone have to actually open the Administrator GUI and add/remove a user there before the file is rewritten?
Interestingly enough, the test page DOES get sent, but the administrator has to remember to ignore the error message. If they forget and try it again, multiple test pages get sent out.
By the way - I just wanted to say that this product has been tremendously well designed, in my opinion.
My only complaint so far is that I'd prefer to have control over the email 'from' address when sending via SMTP, rather than letting the FRM field from the webform populate it. It's a small thing.
All times are GMT - 5 Hours