Re: Web Svc VS remote component hosted in IIS

Tech-Archive recommends: Repair Windows Errors & Optimize Windows Performance

From: DalePres (don-t-spa-m-me_at_lea-ve-me-a-lone--.com)
Date: 03/13/05 

Date: Sat, 12 Mar 2005 21:38:31 -0600

There is nothing that says SOAP is used only over port 80. IIS listens on
port 80 but SOAP can be used on any port, on IIS, on Remoting, or over your
PC's serial port if you wish. You can encode messages with SOAP formatting,
put them on a floppy disk a transport them with SneakerNet if you wish.

DalePres

"Alexander Shirshov" <alexander@omnitalented.com> wrote in message
news:u2deAz3JFHA.1172@TK2MSFTNGP12.phx.gbl...
> Why would anyone use SOAP formatter with Remoting? To fool firewall which
> block binary traffic on 80? Rare case I think. If you're using Remoting
> chances are it's an internal app and you're more or less in control of
> firewalls.
>
> What I see on that crappy low-res graphics (and why there're no tables
> with numbers?) is:
>
> Fig. 2 graph 1: IIS_HTTP_Binary outperforms ASMX slightly up to 50 users,
> then neck-to-neck.
> Fig. 2 graph 2: IIS_HTTP_Binary outperforms ASMX very slightly
>
> Fig. 3 graph 1: IIS_HTTP_Binary outperforms ASMX slightly up to 50 users,
> then neck-to-neck.
> Fig. 3 graph 2: neck-to-neck
>
> Fig. 4: IIS_HTTP_Binary wins clearly in both cases
>
> Fig. 5: IIS_HTTP_Binary wins clearly in both cases
>
> Fig. 6: IIS_HTTP_Binary wins clearly in both cases
>
> Remoting (with binary formatting) hosted in IIS wins! IMO the text
> surrounding the graphics is trying to hide it... Windows Service host with
> TCP is the clear winner of course, but I wouldn't even consider it because
> it's inherently insecure.
>
> Remoting with BinaryFormatter hosted in IIS is the way to go. If you don't
> need interoperability with different applications/platforms, that is.
>
> Alexander
>
>
> "DalePres" <don-t-spa-m-me@lea-ve-me-a-lone--.com> wrote in message
> news:uSlofa3JFHA.2796@tk2msftngp13.phx.gbl...
>> Policies being what they are, it may not help you to know that web
>> services in an asmx file beat all versions of IIS hosted remoting in most
>> of Microsoft's performance comparisons.
> ...
>> http://msdn.microsoft.com/library/default.asp?url=/library/en-us/dnbda/html/bdadotnetarch14.asp
>
>

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Web Svc VS remote component hosted in IIS
    ... the formatter and the port. ... Remoting is FASTER. ... > ASMX outperforms Remoting+IIS with SOAP formatter and falls behind ...
    (microsoft.public.dotnet.languages.csharp)
  • Re: Web Svc VS remote component hosted in IIS
    ... didn't suggest SOAP over HTTP or IIS. ... that web services using asmx is faster than remoting over IIS. ... > assumed you compared SOAP-serialized Remoting components? ... >> There is nothing that says SOAP is used only over port 80. ...
    (microsoft.public.dotnet.languages.csharp)
  • Re: Server hosted by IIS on port 80. Remote Binary Channel also on port 80. problem
    ... I guess that IIS uses port 80 for its "normal" website hosting job. ... You'll need to specify a different port for your remoting application. ... > binary channel. ...
    (microsoft.public.dotnet.framework.remoting)
  • Re: Web Svc VS remote component hosted in IIS
    ... IIS on HTTP channel? ... you compared SOAP-serialized Remoting components? ... why SOAP? ... > There is nothing that says SOAP is used only over port 80. ...
    (microsoft.public.dotnet.languages.csharp)
  • port 80
    ... How can I have my application running on port 80 while ISS and other ... for remoting (without hosting it in IIS) and or simply using sockets. ...
    (microsoft.public.dotnet.languages.csharp)