"301 error" bad or good redirection code?

[incrediblehelp]

I am helping implement a 301 solution for a client on a IIS platform. We are working on redirecting HTML pages to new ASP pages. As you know this is not the easiest thing to do. We can do the 301 redirection through the IIS control panel but it is done we get a "301 error" message instead of a "301 moved permanently" message from a header check:

http://www.framesdirect.com/calvin-k...glasses-av.htm

http://www.framesdirect.com/acuvue/acuvue.htm

Does anyone think this is an issue with the spiders? I know there are other solutions:

1. Set server to run HTML as ASP
I remember an old host of mine doing this before. Basically their is a way in IIS to serve HTML pages as ASP pages without changing the .HTML extensions. If this is possible then we can can just put the 301 redirection code in the HTML page itself.

2. Set the HTML pages to allow for SSI
I know you can set up .HTML pages to allow for server side includes in IIS. I remember talking to my old hoster about this a couple of months ago. Usually to run SSI you need a .SHTML extension, but that is not the case if the host changes the rules in IIS and allows for .HTML as well. If this is done then you can do a include request to the 301 redirect code and the redirection should take place seamlessly.

but these are all server intensive and would suck up a bunch of resources.

So my question is...is the "301 error" I am bad at all?