Protx Changes from August 1

[Charlesn]

Just to join the party - I have been having the same problems.

I'm using Developer 7.0.7 and customers keep intermittently the 'The vendor might not have received the order but your payment has been accepted blah blah...' message. Actinic say its Protx, Protx seem to have little idea what is going (the poor bloke I spoke to in tech support - after being on hold for an hour - seemed ready to top himself) and my client has really started to lose faith with us, Actinic and Protx. In desperation they have setup a Paypal account and will switch to that and ask Protx for a refund if its not sorted soon.

When is somebody going to take responsibility for this? Its all well and good for Actinic to say its a Protx error (which I think it must be - its surely not coincidence that this has all happened since Protx's updates?) but what kind of correspondence has there been between Actinic and Protx to work this out?

I'm about to have a pretty significant sense of humour failure about this!

Charlie

[CurlyWurly]

Was there a time limit on the old URL redirects? For some reason I thought they were just there for a month, but I can't find where it said that. Are they up until further notice?

Just swapped to the new URLs and first 2 test transactions failed miserably!

The first transaction went through ok, until I'd gone past the 3D secure screen. It said that the transaction had been declined and dumped me back at the card selection screen to try again or cancel.

So I tried again with test 2. This time I got past the 3d screen again onto the 'please wait while the card is authorised screen' with the blue moving bar. This time however it stayed on that screen with the scrolling bar for about 4-5 minutes before timing out to a 'Internet Explorer cannot display the webpage' page.

Then, I get an email telling me (as a customer) that my payment was successfull. I go into VSP Admin, and sure enough the first transaction had gone through just fine - despite having told me during the transaction that it had been declined!

It's now about 30 mins after the 'time-out' on the second transaction, and I have not received any notification (either as the vendor or customer) that this transaction failed, and there is no record of it in VSP admin as failed/successful/invalid.

So, just to recap - the first customer was told their transaction was declined, so either went elsewhere without realising that they had paid or entered the payment again and ended up paying twice. And the 2nd customer has no idea what happened to there transaction and I have no clue that anything even went wrong!!!

[TraceyHand]

John, I can recommend getting over to the Protx support forums and posting this problem. They're pretty helpful over there and, assuming you've changed the URLs correctly etc, this is likely to be a problem with the Protx side of things than Actinic.

[jxm28788]

hmmm...

Just followed the instructions for updating the URLs on all of my sites. Everything seemed to go ok for all of the small sites - when I opened the sites in actinic it 'upgraded' the site and told me the OCCPROTX file had been overwritten; I went in and changed the OCCPROTX file back again; and uploaded the site - all as expected.

But when I opened 'the biggie' it didn't give me an upgrade message. Nor did it overwrite the OCCPROTX file. I closed and opened again but still nothing.

So does that mean the updates haven't taken effect for this site? I am doing an upload but will it have recognised that the OCCUpgrade.ini file has changed?

Is there anyway to tell which URLs (old or new) my site is using?

[Darren B]

John i would say that what ever is in the ini file is waht you site is using, actinic only recognises the file has change the 1st time you open the site and does not do it's upgrade thing when you switch to other sites.

I found this out when i did some testing a while back.

D

[jxm28788]

that can't be right - firstly, it worked for the 1st 3 sites, just not the 4th, but then it worked for the 5th site which I opened later. Secondly, if I had to change it for each site I would get into a big recursive mess...

[Darren B]

John

That is a little odd as it is not what happened for me, weird, but as there is only one ini file, then it should apply to all sites.

Maybe someone from actinic might be able to offer some input
D

[chris ashdown]

Letter just received from Protx regarding PREAUTH

Dear Sir/Madam,

PREAUTH extended until 1st November 2007
Protx have extended the deadline for our live merchants to move from the phased-out PREAUTH payment method to the new AUTHENTICATE and AUTHORISE scheme by two months, to 1st November 2007. This is to allow our customers to parallel test their systems and feel comfortable with the new payment types before the old method becomes unavailable.

Please migrate your systems before the 1st November. On that date, PREAUTH will be switched off and transaction registrations with a PREAUTH transaction type will fail.

Detailed information on the AUTHENTICATE protocol can be found in the Integration Documents on the technical support website.

Tighter Control of VendorTxCodes from 1st November 2007
To avoid a large number of problems that have arisen due to flexibility in the allowable characters in VendorTxCodes, Protx will be restricting the acceptable characters in the VSP Direct and VSP Server VendorTxCode fields.

VendorTxCodes will be limited to the characters a-z, A-Z, 0-9 and the minus (-), underscore (_) and full-stop (.) characters ONLY. All other characters will cause the transaction registration to be rejected.

Please ensure that BEFORE 1st November 2007 your code only sends the characters above, or your transaction registrations will be rejected from that date onward.

VSP Form customers already have these format restrictions in place, so you will not need to change your code.

Kind Regards


Protx.

[thedoc01]

I may be jumping to conclusions, but is it not that Protx changed their 'system', expected everyone to immediately adopt, and then found that there were anomalies? There seem to be so may problems that are causing huge distress to customers.

My own experience is that the teamwork involved requires everyone to be on-board before such changes are initiated and unfortunately Protx took some unilateral decisions.
Just a thought.

[RuralWeb]

Protx is becoming a liability IMO

[superbikes]

Hello Everyone,

Here is the workaround to get the new URL's in place. This has been tested and is working as it should...

To change to the new ProtX URLs, the following should be done:

- Open {Actinic main dir}\OCCUpgrade\OCCupgrade.ini
- Find ProtX provider section begins with:
[OCCProvider:22]
- change the following lines:
ProviderURL='https://ukvps.protx.com/vps2Form/'
RemoteProcessScript='submit.asp'
DBPlugInScriptName='OCCPROTXScriptTemplate.pl'
DBProviderURL='https://ukvpstest.protx.com/vps2Form/'
DBRemoteProcessScript='submit.asp'

to

ProviderURL='https://ukvps.protx.com/vspgateway/service/'
RemoteProcessScript='vspform-register.vsp'
DBPlugInScriptName='OCCPROTXScriptTemplate.pl'
DBProviderURL='https://ukvpstest.protx.com/vspgateway/service/'
DBRemoteProcessScript='vspform-register.vsp'

- Increase the version number at the top of this file
- Save the file
- Rerun Actinic and do an upload

Kind regards,

Hi, new to this ,just trying to to start using Protx with Actinic grt error 5005 has anybody used this solution ?

[bekyed]

Hi Guys,

I have tried this new workaround url for protx on version 7.05 FJBA without success, then tried to change it back to the original file and thats not working either.

Can anyone help?

Wayne.

[Darren B]

i would not be supprised if your secret key has been over writtien, it should not have been but probably has. check you protxocc file

D

[bekyed]

Right.

I have changed to Bruce's urls, updated the psp's v7 and swapped my 2.20 protocol to 2.22 and I am still getting the errors about the vendor clould not be contacted - your payment has been taken, after the payment has been entered and after around 5 minutes waiting for authorisation.

This is not good.

Wayne.

[wjcampbe]

Can you explain how you did this?

swapped my 2.20 protocol to 2.22

there should have been nothing to swap - unless you mean you installed the newer PSPSetup.