Re: WSE 2.0 vs Remoting !?!

Tech Tip: Click here to run a free scan for Windows Errors and optimize PC performance

From: SA (informatica_at_freemail.nl)
Date: 09/20/04 

Date: Mon, 20 Sep 2004 12:33:33 -0500

Right, I figured that out in the mean time.

Thanks, 

-- 
Sven
"jordang" <jordang@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:E08A55FE-25D8-4815-89B4-F1410D11B793@microsoft.com...
> since asp.net 2 web projects code files are dynamically compiled, they
dont
> compile into a typical assembly. I had to write my custom token manager in
a
> different project(still .net 2), and reference that projects assembly and
> class name from the web.config file.
>
> hope that helps,
> jordan
>
> "SA" wrote:
>
> > Yes, OK, but that's not what I meant.
> >
> > I want to create web services with a custom security token manager, so I
> > need to know the namespace and assembly name of my own web service
project,
> > something that doesn't seem readily available in VS 2005 (nor is it
> > configurable)?
> >
> > How do you get around that?
> >
> > It seems that you're the only one who gets this to work, so some
guidance
> > would be really helpful, AFAICT.
> >
> > -- 
> >
> > Sven
> >
> >
> > "Softwaremaker" <msdn@removethis.softwaremaker.net> wrote in message
> > news:umoqPn7iEHA.2412@TK2MSFTNGP15.phx.gbl...
> > > The referenced namespace for WSE2 is Microsoft.Web.Services2
> > >
> > > These are the key configs in your *.config file for WSE2.0
> > >
> > > <?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
> > > <configuration>
> > >   <configSections>
> > >     <section name="microsoft.web.services2"
> > > type="Microsoft.Web.Services2.Configuration.WebServicesConfiguration,
> > > Microsoft.Web.Services2, Version=2.0.0.0, Culture=neutral,
> > > PublicKeyToken=31bf3856ad364e35" />
> > >   </configSections>
> > >   <system.web>
> > >
> > >     <globalization requestEncoding="utf-8" responseEncoding="utf-8" />
> > >     <webServices>
> > >       <soapExtensionTypes>
> > >         <add type="Microsoft.Web.Services2.WebServicesExtension,
> > > Microsoft.Web.Services2, Version=2.0.0.0, Culture=neutral,
> > > PublicKeyToken=31bf3856ad364e35" priority="1" group="0" />
> > >       </soapExtensionTypes>
> > >     </webServices>
> > >   </system.web>
> > >   <microsoft.web.services2>
> > >
> > > hth.
> > > -- 
> > > Thank you very much
> > >
> > > Warmest Regards,
> > > Softwaremaker
> > > Architect | Evangelist | Consultant
> > >
> > > +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> > >
> > > "SA" <informatica@freemail.nl> wrote in message
> > > news:uCRscz5iEHA.1652@TK2MSFTNGP09.phx.gbl...
> > > > OK, but you need to reference your assemblies in your web.config
file.
> > > >
> > > > I am having trouble understanding how to reference my web service
> > assembly
> > > > because I don't know what its namespace or assembly name is.
> > > >
> > > > -- 
> > > >
> > > > Sven
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > "Softwaremaker" <msdn@removethis.softwaremaker.net> wrote in message
> > > > news:%23M8%230fbiEHA.3612@TK2MSFTNGP12.phx.gbl...
> > > > > Hi,
> > > > >
> > > > > The same way I used with VS2003 and .NET 1.1
> > > > >
> > > > > I added the References to the Services2.dll manually and of
course,
> > > > updated
> > > > > the *.config file manually too.
> > > > >
> > > > > Since .NET 1.1 can be installed and run side-by-side with .NET
2.0,
> > WSE
> > > > > assemblies can be referenced easily. The assemblies of WSE relies
on a
> > > > > small set of the .NET Framework BCLs. Most of the work is done
either
> > > > > internally (i.e. XML Encryption, see
> > > > > Microsoft.Web.Services2.Security.[Cryptography|Xml]) or via
P/Invoke
> > > (i.e.
> > > > > Kerberos/X509, see advapi32.dll/crypt32.dll). If anything is to
break,
> > > > > chances are that it will be the VS add-in (Microsoft WSE 2.0
Settings
> > > > > Tool), --> [therefore the manual settings you have to do], or one
of
> > the
> > > > > supported transports (i.e. TCP).
> > > > >
> > > > > hth.
> > > > > -- 
> > > > > Thank you very much
> > > > >
> > > > > Warmest Regards,
> > > > > Softwaremaker
> > > > > Architect | Evangelist | Consultant
> > > > >
> > > > > +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> > > > >
> > > > > "SA" <informatica@freemail.nl> wrote in message
> > > > > news:OzC8hAXiEHA.356@tk2msftngp13.phx.gbl...
> > > > > > Are you using WSE 2.0 from VS 2005? How?
> > > > > >
> > > > > > -- 
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Sven
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > "Softwaremaker" <msdn@removethis.softwaremaker.net> wrote in
message
> > > > > > news:eXOZx7JhEHA.596@TK2MSFTNGP11.phx.gbl...
> > > > > > > :) I hope it doesnt too. My order is slightly different. I
began
> > > with
> > > > > .NET
> > > > > > > 1.1 first followed by .NET 2.*
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Good luck.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > ~Softwaremaker
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > "William Stacey [MVP]" <staceywREMOVE@mvps.org> wrote in
message
> > > > > > > news:uYh9ZQHhEHA.596@TK2MSFTNGP11.phx.gbl...
> > > > > > > > That is good to know.  I will try installing 1.1 along side
2.0.
> > > > Hope
> > > > > > it
> > > > > > > > does not chunk my beta VS 2005.  Cheers!
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > -- 
> > > > > > > > William Stacey, MVP
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > "Softwaremaker" <msdn@removethis.softwaremaker.net> wrote in
> > > message
> > > > > > > > news:uvaqjrFhEHA.636@TK2MSFTNGP12.phx.gbl...
> > > > > > > > > I had both .NET 1.1 and 2.* installed side-by-side.
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > As such, I could use WSE2.0 in VS2005 with no
problems....so
> > far
> > > > ;)
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > -- 
> > > > > > > > > Thank you very much
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Warmest Regards,
> > > > > > > > > Softwaremaker
> > > > > > > > > Architect | Evangelist | Consultant
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > ==========================================
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > "William Stacey [MVP]" <staceywREMOVE@mvps.org> wrote in
> > message
> > > > > > > > > news:uCzr87zgEHA.3916@TK2MSFTNGP11.phx.gbl...
> > > > > > > > > > I would tend to agree.  However if you want to play with
VS
> > > > 2005,
> > > > > > wse
> > > > > > > > does
> > > > > > > > > > not install with framework 2.0 yet AFAICT.
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > -- 
> > > > > > > > > > William Stacey, MVP
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > "Jeffrey Hasan" <jeff@noreply.com> wrote in message
> > > > > > > > > > news:#n8xviMgEHA.2544@TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...
> > > > > > > > > > > If at all possible, I recommend using WSE 2.0 to
construct
> > > > > > services
> > > > > > > > that
> > > > > > > > > > > communicate over TCP. They are easier to build, and
they
> > > give
> > > > > you
> > > > > > a
> > > > > > > > > > > surprising amount of flexibility in exchanging custom
> > types.
> > > > The
> > > > > > > issue
> > > > > > > > > of
> > > > > > > > > > > "performance" may be a subjective one. How many
requests
> > > will
> > > > > your
> > > > > > > > > > > service/remoting solution experiencing? What level of
> > > latency
> > > > is
> > > > > > > > > > acceptable?
> > > > > > > > > > > The QuickStarts that ship with WSE 2.0 make it easy to
> > build
> > > > > > > SOAP/TCP
> > > > > > > > > > > solutions, so I would try it out and decide for
yourself
> > > > whether
> > > > > > > it's
> > > > > > > > a
> > > > > > > > > > good
> > > > > > > > > > > approach for what you need. There are also a number of
> > > > excellent
> > > > > > > > online
> > > > > > > > > > > articles, and a book by yours truly that delves into
> > > > > implementing
> > > > > > > > > SOAP/TCP
> > > > > > > > > > > services.
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > Good luck!
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > Jeffrey Hasan, MCSD
> > > > > > > > > > > President, Bluestone Partners, Inc.
> > > > > > > > > > > -----------------------------------------------
> > > > > > > > > > > Author of: Expert SOA in C# Using WSE 2.0 (APress,
2004)
> > > > > > > > > > > http://www.bluestonepartners.com/soa.aspx
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > "Pitone" <edelfiume@removeme_tin.it> wrote in message
> > > > > > > > > > > news:uQoLb#xfEHA.704@TK2MSFTNGP09.phx.gbl...
> > > > > > > > > > > > I'm exploring WSE 2.0 and .NET Remoting at the same
time
> > > > (but
> > > > > > for
> > > > > > > > > > > different
> > > > > > > > > > > > reasons!)... I read that with WSE 2.0 I can create
web
> > > > > services
> > > > > > to
> > > > > > > > > > support
> > > > > > > > > > > > directly a communication over TCP instead of using
HTTP
> > so
> > > > it
> > > > > > > seems
> > > > > > > > > that
> > > > > > > > > > > now
> > > > > > > > > > > > I can build a windows service to expose "web
services"
> > > over
> > > > > TCP
> > > > > > > > using
> > > > > > > > > > WSE
> > > > > > > > > > > > without IIS....
> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > It's quite near .NET Remoting or am I wrong?
Microsoft
> > is
> > > > > going
> > > > > > to
> > > > > > > > the
> > > > > > > > > > web
> > > > > > > > > > > > services architectures direction with next
generation
> > > > > products,
> > > > > > > Don
> > > > > > > > > Box
> > > > > > > > > > > said
> > > > > > > > > > > > at PDC "are you sure it's a good solution to adopt a
> > > > > technology
> > > > > > > > > > [Remoting]
> > > > > > > > > > > > built by TWO developers" (for me this means: let's
adopt
> > > > other
> > > > > > > > > > > > solutions....) and WSE 2.0 let me create something
to
> > > > override
> > > > > > > .NET
> > > > > > > > > > > Remoting
> > > > > > > > > > > > so the questions are:
> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > a) is right to think that WSE are allowing us to
avoid
> > the
> > > > use
> > > > > > of
> > > > > > > > .NET
> > > > > > > > > > > > Remoting to do the same things?
> > > > > > > > > > > > b) from a performance point of view (without
considering
> > > the
> > > > > > first
> > > > > > > > > > > question)
> > > > > > > > > > > > which is the better solution to build a distributed
> > > intranet
> > > > > > > > solution
> > > > > > > > > > with
> > > > > > > > > > > > .NET?
> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > tnx, regards
> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > pit.
> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
> >