Search Results

Search found 6642 results on 266 pages for 'wcf sessions'.

Page 73/266 | < Previous Page | 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80  | Next Page >

• Silverlight, WCF service, integrated security AND ssl/https not possible?

  - by Flores

  I have this setup that works perfectly when using http. A silverlight 3 client .net 4 WCF service hosted in IIS with basicHttpBinding and using integrated security on the site When setting https to required on the website the setup stops working. Using the wcftestclient on the uri I get the message: The HTTP request is unauthorized with client authentication scheme 'Anonymous'. The authentication header received from the server was 'Negotiate,NTLM'. The remote server returned an error: (401) Unauthorized. Maybe this makes sense because the wcftestclient does not pass credentials? in the web.config the security mode for the service binding is set is set to 'Transport'. The silverlight client is created like this: BasicHttpBinding basicHttpBinding = new BasicHttpBinding(); basicHttpBinding.Security.Mode = BasicHttpSecurityMode.Transport; var serviceClient = new ImportServiceClient(basicHttpBinding, serviceAddress); The service address is ofcourse starting with https:// And the silverlight client reports this error: The provided URI scheme 'https' is invalid; expected 'http'. Parameter name: via Remember, swithing it back to http (and setting security mode to 'TransportCredentialOnly' makes everything working again. Is the setup I want even supported? If so, how should it be configured?

  Read the article

• singleton pattern in Windows Activation Service

  - by Joshua

  Hello I have a few WCF services that are currently being self hosted, in a very basic NT Service. I want to expand my application to add provisioning of WCF Services, and updates, as well as isolation (I want each WCF Service to be in its own AppDomain). These WCF Services contain logic that needs to be run on a regular basis, pinging the database, and getting information from external devices so that when a request comes in the data is readily available. I'm thinking about trying out Windows Activation Service, because i really like the provisioning, and isolation that comes with a managed services infrastructure. If I didn't use WAS I would essentially have to write the same code myself. From what I understand though WAS does not really support the model of having a service that is running before someone actually calls a method on the service. the article I read here MSDN Article Link states "That means in essence that out-of-the-box WAS hosting is not something that is really suited for sessionful or singleton services. It is more suitable for stateless per-call services." it does say that "Out of the box" so I'm wondering if anyone has used WAS to host a WCF service that really behaves more like an NT Service (starting and stopping independantly of having a method called upon it). Or any other ideas would be great. I was planning on writting this infrastructure myself, to host WCF services in a custom ServiceHost, and put their execution in a seporate AppDomain, as well as allow for provision of these services after initial installation, along with updates. However, I would MUCH MUCH MUCH rather not own that code if I don't have to. thanks Joshua

  Read the article

• How can I use nested Async (WCF) calls within foreach loops in Silverlight ?

  - by Peter St Angelo

  The following code contains a few nested async calls within some foreach loops. I know the silverlight/wcf calls are called asyncrously -but how can I ensure that my wcfPhotographers, wcfCategories and wcfCategories objects are ready before the foreach loop start? I'm sure I am going about this all the wrong way -and would appreciate an help you could give. private void PopulateControl() { List<CustomPhotographer> PhotographerList = new List<CustomPhotographer>(); proxy.GetPhotographerNamesCompleted += proxy_GetPhotographerNamesCompleted; proxy.GetPhotographerNamesAsync(); //for each photographer foreach (var eachPhotographer in wcfPhotographers) { CustomPhotographer thisPhotographer = new CustomPhotographer(); thisPhotographer.PhotographerName = eachPhotographer.ContactName; thisPhotographer.PhotographerId = eachPhotographer.PhotographerID; thisPhotographer.Categories = new List<CustomCategory>(); proxy.GetCategoryNamesFilteredByPhotographerCompleted += proxy_GetCategoryNamesFilteredByPhotographerCompleted; proxy.GetCategoryNamesFilteredByPhotographerAsync(thisPhotographer.PhotographerId); // for each category foreach (var eachCatergory in wcfCategories) { CustomCategory thisCategory = new CustomCategory(); thisCategory.CategoryName = eachCatergory.CategoryName; thisCategory.CategoryId = eachCatergory.CategoryID; thisCategory.SubCategories = new List<CustomSubCategory>(); proxy.GetSubCategoryNamesFilteredByCategoryCompleted += proxy_GetSubCategoryNamesFilteredByCategoryCompleted; proxy.GetSubCategoryNamesFilteredByCategoryAsync(thisPhotographer.PhotographerId,thisCategory.CategoryId); // for each subcategory foreach(var eachSubCatergory in wcfSubCategories) { CustomSubCategory thisSubCatergory = new CustomSubCategory(); thisSubCatergory.SubCategoryName = eachSubCatergory.SubCategoryName; thisSubCatergory.SubCategoryId = eachSubCatergory.SubCategoryID; } thisPhotographer.Categories.Add(thisCategory); } PhotographerList.Add(thisPhotographer); } PhotographerNames.ItemsSource = PhotographerList; } void proxy_GetPhotographerNamesCompleted(object sender, GetPhotographerNamesCompletedEventArgs e) { wcfPhotographers = e.Result.ToList(); } void proxy_GetCategoryNamesFilteredByPhotographerCompleted(object sender, GetCategoryNamesFilteredByPhotographerCompletedEventArgs e) { wcfCategories = e.Result.ToList(); } void proxy_GetSubCategoryNamesFilteredByCategoryCompleted(object sender, GetSubCategoryNamesFilteredByCategoryCompletedEventArgs e) { wcfSubCategories = e.Result.ToList(); }

  Read the article

• Restful WCF Service - how to send data with illegal XML characters?

  - by Chris

  I have a RESTful WCF web service. One of my methods has several input parameters. One of the input parameters is a string. Some times the data I am passing to this web method will include content that has one or more "illegal characters" - i.e. "&". So, I replace this with &amp; before passing it to the web service - but it still throws an exception. The exception isn't visible, as the data never reaches the web service, but I know that it is this content that is causing the problem, as I have done several tests sending data that doesn't contain an illegal XML character, and every time it worked, but any data containing "&" will fail. Am I not supposed to replace "&" with &amp;? Please refer to the web method below: [WebGet] public MapNode AddMapNode(string nodeText) { return new inProcessEntities().AddMapNode(nodeText); } Please help on how I can fix this. Thanks. Chris

  Read the article

• Can a stateless WCF service benefit from built-in database connection pooling?

  - by vladimir

  I understand that a typical .NET application that accesses a(n SQL Server) database doesn't have to do anything in particular in order to benefit from the connection pooling. Even if an application repeatedly opens and closes database connections, they do get pooled by the framework (assuming that things such as credentials do not change from call to call). My usage scenario seems to be a bit different. When my service gets instantiated, it opens a database connection once, does some work, closes the connection and returns the result. Then it gets torn down by the WCF, and the next incoming call creates a new instance of the service. In other words, my service gets instantiated per client call, as in [ServiceBehavior(InstanceContextMode = InstanceContextMode.PerCall)]. The service accesses an SQL Server 2008 database. I'm using .NET framework 3.5 SP1. Does the connection pooling still work in this scenario, or I need to roll my own connection pool in form of a singleton or by some other means (IInstanceContextProvider?). I would rather avoid reinventing the wheel, if possible.

  Read the article

• How to restart a wcf server from within a client?

  - by djerry

  Hey guys, I'm using Wcf for server - client communication. The server will need to run as a service, so there's no GUI. The admin can change settings using the client program and for those changes to be made on server, it needs to restart. This is my server setup NetTcpBinding binding = new NetTcpBinding(SecurityMode.Message); Uri address = new Uri("net.tcp://localhost:8000"); //_svc = new ServiceHost(typeof(MonitoringSystemService), address); _monSysService = new MonitoringSystemService(); _svc = new ServiceHost(_monSysService, address); publishMetaData(_svc, "http://localhost:8001"); _svc.AddServiceEndpoint(typeof(IMonitoringSystemService), binding, "Monitoring Server"); _svc.Open(); MonitoringSystemService is a class i'm using to handle client - server comm. It looks like this: [CallbackBehavior(ConcurrencyMode = ConcurrencyMode.Reentrant)] [ServiceBehavior(InstanceContextMode = InstanceContextMode.Single, MaxItemsInObjectGraph = 2147483647)] public class MonitoringSystemService : IMonitoringSystemService {} So i need to call a restart method on the client to the server, but i don't know how to restart (even stop - start) the server. I hope i'm not missing any vital information. Thanks in advance.

  Read the article

• How to call a service operation at a REST style WCF endpoint uri?

  - by Dieter Domanski

  Hi, is it possible to call a service operation at a wcf endpoint uri with a self hosted service? I want to call some default service operation when the client enters the endpoint uri of the service. In the following sample these uris correctly call the declared operations (SayHello, SayHi): - http://localhost:4711/clerk/hello - http://localhost:4711/clerk/hi But the uri - http://localhost:4711/clerk does not call the declared SayWelcome operation. Instead it leads to the well known 'Metadata publishing disabled' page. Enabling mex does not help, in this case the mex page is shown at the endpoint uri. private void StartSampleServiceHost() { ServiceHost serviceHost = new ServiceHost(typeof(Clerk), new Uri( "http://localhost:4711/clerk/")); ServiceEndpoint endpoint = serviceHost.AddServiceEndpoint(typeof(IClerk), new WebHttpBinding(), ""); endpoint.Behaviors.Add(new WebHttpBehavior()); serviceHost.Open(); } [ServiceContract] public interface IClerk { [OperationContract, WebGet(UriTemplate = "")] Stream SayWelcome(); [OperationContract, WebGet(UriTemplate = "/hello/")] Stream SayHello(); [OperationContract, WebGet(UriTemplate = "/hi/")] Stream SayHi(); } public class Clerk : IClerk { public Stream SayWelcome() { return Say("welcome"); } public Stream SayHello() { return Say("hello"); } public Stream SayHi() { return Say("hi"); } private Stream Say(string what) { string page = @"<html><body>" + what + "</body></html>"; return new MemoryStream(Encoding.UTF8.GetBytes(page)); } } Is there any way to disable the mex handling and to enable a declared operation instead? Thanks in advance, Dieter

  Read the article

• How to detect a WCF session crash before calling a contract method?

  - by brain_pusher

  I am using a session mode for my WCF service. The problem is the following: if session is broken and no longer exists, client can't know it before calling a contract. For example, if the service has been restarted, the client's session id is invalid, because that session has been closed on the server side. I check the channel state before calling the contract and its value is CommunicationState.Opened even if session is already broken. So, when I call the contract after this check I get a CommunicationException with this message: The remote endpoint no longer recognizes this sequence. This is most likely due to an abort on the remote endpoint. The value of wsrm:Identifier is not a known Sequence identifier. The reliable session was faulted. Is there any workaround? I need a way to get an appropriate session state before calling a contract so that I can restore it without getting an exception. P.S. The CommunicationException type is general, so I can't detect a session crash by catching this exception. P.P.S. I have asked the similar question here, but in that case I didn't know the reason, now I don't know how to evade it.

  Read the article

• Best way to catch a WCF exception in Silverlight?

  - by wahrhaft

  I have a Silverlight 2 application that is consuming a WCF service. As such, it uses asynchronous callbacks for all the calls to the methods of the service. If the service is not running, or it crashes, or the network goes down, etc before or during one of these calls, an exception is generated as you would expect. The problem is, I don't know how to catch this exception. Because it is an asynchronous call, I can't wrap my begin call with a try/catch block and have it pick up an exception that happens after the program has moved on from that point. Because the service proxy is automatically generated, I can't put a try/catch block on each and every generated function that calls EndInvoke (where the exception actually shows up). These generated functions are also surrounded by External Code in the call stack, so there's nowhere else in the stack to put a try/catch either. I can't put the try/catch in my callback functions, because the exception occurs before they would get called. There is an Application_UnhandledException function in my App.xaml.cs, which captures all unhandled exceptions. I could use this, but it seems like a messy way to do it. I'd rather reserve this function for the truly unexpected errors (aka bugs) and not end up with code in this function for every circumstance I'd like to deal with in a specific way. Am I missing an obvious solution? Or am I stuck using Application_UnhandledException? [Edit] As mentioned below, the Error property is exactly what I was looking for. What is throwing me for a loop is that the fact that the exception is thrown and appears to be uncaught, yet execution is able to continue. It triggers the Application_UnhandledException event and causes VS2008 to break execution, but continuing in the debugger allows execution to continue. It's not really a problem, it just seems odd.

  Read the article

• Visual Studio 2010 randomly unable to debug WCF service.

  - by rossisdead

  I'm running Visual Studio 2010 on a Windows 7 x64 machine, and occasionally VS is giving me the good old "The remote procedure could not be debugged.This usually indicates that debugging has not been enabled on the server" error that a lot of people ask about. My problem, though, is that it seems to only do this randomly(it can be anywhere from a few minutes to a few hours), and after I've made plenty of successful calls to the service already. It doesn't prevent the service from working. It still returns values and doesn't throw any errors. The only difference is that annoying dialog pops up everytime I start to debug my application. I should mention that I'm connecting the WCF service from a WPF application. If I launch the web site the service is part of, I don't get the dialog. A few of the things I've tried that do not work: Killing and restarting the server. Compiling the web server in x86 Enabling tracing, but couldn't find any problems. Is this just a bug in Visual Studio 2010, or is there something I'm missing?

  Read the article

• How many WCF connections can a single host handle?

  - by mafutrct

  I'll try to explain this with an example. I'm writing a chat application. There are users that can join chat rooms. A user has to log in before he can join any room. Currently, there is a single service. A user logs in using this service. Then, the user sends and receives messages for all joined rooms via this single service. channel.Login("Hans Moleman", "password"); channel.JoinRoom("name of room"); channel.SendChat("name of room", "hello"); I'm thinking about changing the design so there is a new WCF connection for each joined room. In the actual app, the number of connections is likely going to be in the range of 10-100, possibly more. Is this a good idea? Or are ~100 connections per client too much? The server should be able to handle many clients (range 100-1000, later up to 10k). In case it matters, I'm using NetTcpBinding.

  Read the article

• Silverlight Business Application template with WCF is throwing warning.

  - by Manoj

  Hi, I am using the Silvelight Business Application template. I wrote a function which uses Membership.getUserList function to return the user list. I tried exposing it as Service using WCF. But when I try to compile the client side code it throws a warning saying "Client Proxy Generation for user_authentication.Web.Service1 failed'. Why does it happen? The complete warning message is: Warning 4 Client proxy generation for service 'user_authentication.Web.Service1' failed: Generating metadata files... Warning: Unable to load a service with configName 'user_authentication.Web.Service1'. To export a service provide both the assembly containing the service type and an executable with configuration for this service. Details:Either none of the assemblies passed were executables with configuration files or none of the configuration files contained services with the config name 'user_authentication.Web.Service1'. Warning: No metadata files were generated. No service contracts were exported. To export a service, use the /serviceName option. To export data contracts, specify the /dataContractOnly option. This can sometimes occur in certain security contexts, such as when the assembly is loaded over a UNC network file share. If this is the case, try copying the assembly into a trusted environment and running it.

  Read the article

• How to specify allowed exceptions in WCF's configuration file?

  - by tucaz

  Hello! I´m building a set of WCF services for internal use through all our applications. For exception handling I created a default fault class so I can return treated message to the caller if its the case or a generic one when I have no clue what happened. Fault contract: [DataContract(Name = "DefaultFault", Namespace = "http://fnac.com.br/api/2010/03")] public class DefaultFault { public DefaultFault(DefaultFaultItem[] items) { if (items == null || items.Length== 0) { throw new ArgumentNullException("items"); } StringBuilder sbItems = new StringBuilder(); for (int i = 0; i Specifying that my method can throw this exception so the consuming client will be aware of it: [OperationContract(Name = "PlaceOrder")] [FaultContract(typeof(DefaultFault))] [WebInvoke(UriTemplate = "/orders", BodyStyle = WebMessageBodyStyle.Bare, ResponseFormat = WebMessageFormat.Json, RequestFormat = WebMessageFormat.Json, Method = "POST")] string PlaceOrder(Order newOrder); Most of time we will use just .NET to .NET communication with usual binds and everything works fine since we are talking the same language. However, as you can see in the service contract declaration I have a WebInvoke attribute (and a webHttp binding) in order to be able to also talk JSON since one of our apps will be built for iPhone and this guy will talk JSON. My problem is that whenever I throw a FaultException and have includeExceptionDetails="false" in the config file the calling client will get a generic HTTP error instead of my custom message. I understand that this is the correct behavior when includeExceptionDetails is turned off, but I think I saw some configuration a long time ago to allow some exceptions/faults to pass through the service boundaries. Is there such thing like this? If not, what do u suggest for my case? Thanks a LOT!

  Read the article

• Why does the WCF 3.5 REST Starter Kit do this?

  - by Brandon

  I am setting up a REST endpoint that looks like the following: [WebInvoke(Method = "POST", UriTemplate = "?format=json", BodyStyle = WebMessageBodyStyle.WrappedRequest, ResponseFormat = WebMessageFormat.Json)] and [WebInvoke(Method = "DELETE", UriTemplate = "?token={token}&format=json", ResponseFormat = WebMessageFormat.Json)] The above throws the following error: UriTemplateTable does not support '?format=json' and '?token={token}&format=json' since they are not equivalent, but cannot be disambiguated because they have equivalent paths and the same common literal values for the query string. See the documentation for UriTemplateTable for more detail. I am not an expert at WCF, but I would imagine that it should map first by the HTTP Method and then by the URI Template. It appears to be backwards. If both of my URI templates are: ?token={token}&format=json This works because they are equivalent and it then appears to look at the HTTP Method where one is POST and the other is DELETE. Is REST supposed to work this way? Why are the URI Template Tables not being sorted first by HTTP Method and then by URI Template? This can cause some serious frustrations when 1 HTTP Method requires a parameter and another does not, or if I want to do optional parameters (e.g. if the 'format' parameter is not passed, default to XML).

  Read the article

• WCF newbie - how to install and use a SSL certificate?

  - by Shaul

  This should be a snap for anyone who's done it before... I'm trying to set up a self-hosted WCF service using NetTcpBinding. I got a trial SSL certificate from Thawte and successfully installed that in my IIS store, and I think I've got it correctly set up in the service - at least it doesn't exception out on me! Now, I'm trying to connect the client (this is still all on my dev machine), and it's giving me an error, "Message = "The X.509 certificate CN=ssl.mydomain.com, OU=For Test Purposes Only. No assurances., OU=IT, O=My Company, L=My Town, S=None, C=IL chain building failed. The certificate that was used has a trust chain that cannot be verified. Replace the certificate or change the certificateValidationMode. A certificate chain processed, but terminated in a root certificate which is not trusted by the trust provider." Ooookeeeey... now what? Client code (I want to do this in code, not app.config): var baseAddress = "localhost"; var factory = new DuplexChannelFactory<IMyWCFService>(new InstanceContext(SiteServer.Instance)); factory.Endpoint.Address = new EndpointAddress("net.tcp://{0}:8000/".Fmt(baseAddress)); var binding = new NetTcpBinding(SecurityMode.Message); binding.Security.Message.ClientCredentialType = MessageCredentialType.UserName; factory.Endpoint.Binding = binding; var u = factory.Credentials.UserName; u.UserName = userName; u.Password = password; return factory.CreateChannel()

  Read the article

• could not execute a stored procedure(using DAAB) from a client(aspx page) to a wcf service

  - by user1144695

  i am trying to store data to sql database from a asp.net client website through a stored procedure(using DAAB) in a wcf service hosted in a asp.net empty website.When i try to store data to the DB i get the following error: ** - The server was unable to process the request due to an internal error. For more information about the error, either turn on IncludeExceptionDetailInFaults (either from ServiceBehaviorAttribute or from the <serviceDebug> configuration behavior) on the server in order to send the exception information back to the client, or turn on tracing as per the Microsoft .NET Framework SDK documentation and inspect the server trace logs. ** When i try to debug i get the following exception: Activation error occured while trying to get instance of type Database, key "" in the code-- Database db = EnterpriseLibraryContainer.Current.GetInstance<Database>("MyInstance"); where my app.config is <?xml version="1.0"?> <configuration> <configSections> <section name="dataConfiguration" type="Microsoft.Practices.EnterpriseLibrary.Data.Configuration.DatabaseSettings, Microsoft.Practices.EnterpriseLibrary.Data, Version=5.0.414.0, Culture=neutral, PublicKeyToken=31bf3856ad364e35" requirePermission="true"/> </configSections> <dataConfiguration defaultDatabase="MyInstance"/> <connectionStrings> <add name="MyInstance" connectionString="Data Source=BLRKDAS307581\KD;Integrated Security=True;User ID=SAPIENT\kdas3;Password=ilove0LINUX" providerName="System.Data.SqlClient" /> </connectionStrings> <startup> <supportedRuntime version="v4.0" sku=".NETFramework,Version=v4.0"/> </startup> </configuration> Can anyone help me with it? Thanks in advance...

  Read the article

• Which way is preferred when doing asynchronous WCF calls?

  - by Mikael Svenson

  When invoking a WCF service asynchronous there seems to be two ways it can be done. 1. public void One() { WcfClient client = new WcfClient(); client.BegindoSearch("input", ResultOne, null); } private void ResultOne(IAsyncResult ar) { WcfClient client = new WcfClient(); string data = client.EnddoSearch(ar); } 2. public void Two() { WcfClient client = new WcfClient(); client.doSearchCompleted += TwoCompleted; client.doSearchAsync("input"); } void TwoCompleted(object sender, doSearchCompletedEventArgs e) { string data = e.Result; } And with the new Task<T> class we have an easy third way by wrapping the synchronous operation in a task. 3. public void Three() { WcfClient client = new WcfClient(); var task = Task<string>.Factory.StartNew(() => client.doSearch("input")); string data = task.Result; } They all give you the ability to execute other code while you wait for the result, but I think Task<T> gives better control on what you execute before or after the result is retrieved. Are there any advantages or disadvantages to using one over the other? Or scenarios where one way of doing it is more preferable?

  Read the article

• What kind of online hosting do I need for a WCF-based service?

  - by mafutrct

  First of all, I'm not sure if SO is the right place to ask. Please migrate me if needed. I would like to host a WCF-based service so it is available for everyone. While hosting it on my personal, local servers succeeded, I would prefer to move it to an external service provider for various reasons. I'll be blunt: I have no clue about hosting providers. I know there are webhosters, virtual and root servers and several other services. What I would like to know is what kind of hosting I need in my case. I understand that a root server would easily fulfill my requirements, but that is not exactly cheap. The program I'd like to run on the server requires .NET 4, preferably on a windows machine. Access to a folder in the file system is much appreciated (1 GB storage is enough by far). Communication with clients (in form of an applications written in .NET) via opening a port on the server. Traffic is low (<<1 GB/month?) There is no website. Having the provider perform updates would be nice. My understanding is that a virtual server would be a possible solution. Prices seem start at around 5€/month, which is ok for me. However, I read that for these cheap solutions RAM is severely limited (~400 MB), and I'm not confident that is enough to run windows and a .NET application.

  Read the article

• Remote assistance from Remote Desktop sessions: unable to control

  - by syneticon-dj

  Since Remote Control (aka Session Shadowing) is gone for good in Server 2012 Remote Desktop Session hosts, I am looking for a replacement to support users in a cross-domain environment. Since Remote Assistance is supposed to work for Remote Desktop Sessions as well, I tried leveraging that for support purposes by enabling unsolicited remote assistance for all Remote Desktop Session Hosts via Group Policy. All seems to be working well except that the "expert" seems to be unable to actually excercise any mouse or keyboard control when the remote assistance session has been initiated from a Remote Desktop session itself. Mouse clicks and keyboard strokes from the "expert" session (Server 2012) seem to simply be ignored even after the assisted user has acknowledged the request for control. I would like to see this working through RD sessions for the support staff due to a number of reasons: not every support agent would have the appropriate client system version to support users on a specific terminal server (e.g. an agent might have a Windows Vista or Windows 7 station and thus be unable to offer assistance to users on Server 2012 RDSHs) a support agent would not necessarily have a station which is a member of the specific destination domain (mainly due to the reason that more than a single domain's users are supported) what am I missing?

  Read the article

• Timeout settings for Remote Desktop Sessions to lock

  - by atroon

  Our office uses a Windows 2003 server to provide access to an accounting application. Recently I was asked to increase the amount of time it takes for the session to lock itself and require the entry of the user's password to resume. That seems to be about ten minutes, at present. I am familiar with group policy and have tweaked those settings to scavenge sessions (and thereby licenses) from sessions that have been disconnected (by the user closing the mstsc.exe client or by a network issue). That's simple and straightforward. But I can't find anything in GP to allow a longer time period before the RDP client window goes black and then, when clicked upon, requires a username and password to resume the session. I must admit this would be nice personally as well, since most of my time is spent documenting the application and/or monitoring its database, so I usually have a window open to the terminal server along with the rest of the staff in the accounting center, but I interact with it very little. I usually enter my password 10-15 times per workday, but I'm pretty good at it by now. ;) So, can this timeout period be adjusted, or are we out of luck?

  Read the article

• How to fix "could not find a base address that matches schema http"... in WCF

  - by Craig Shearer

  I'm trying to deploy a WCF service to my server, hosted in IIS. Naturally it works on my machine :) But when I deploy it, I get the following error: This collection already contains an address with scheme http. There can be at most one address per scheme in this collection. Googling on this, I find that I have to put a serviceHostingEnvironment element into the web.config file: <serviceHostingEnvironment> <baseAddressPrefixFilters> <add prefix="http://mywebsiteurl"/> </baseAddressPrefixFilters> </serviceHostingEnvironment> But once I have done this, I get the following: Could not find a base address that matches scheme http for the endpoint with binding BasicHttpBinding. Registered base address schemes are [https]. It seems it doesn't know what the base address is, but how do I specify it? Here's the relevant section of my web.config file: <system.serviceModel> <serviceHostingEnvironment> <baseAddressPrefixFilters> <add prefix="http://mywebsiteurl"/> </baseAddressPrefixFilters> </serviceHostingEnvironment> <behaviors> <serviceBehaviors> <behavior name="WcfPortalBehavior"> <serviceMetadata httpGetEnabled="true"/> <serviceDebug includeExceptionDetailInFaults="true"/> </behavior> </serviceBehaviors> </behaviors> <bindings> <basicHttpBinding> <binding name="BasicHttpBinding_IWcfPortal" maxBufferSize="2147483647" maxReceivedMessageSize="2147483647" receiveTimeout="00:10:00" sendTimeout="00:10:00" openTimeout="00:10:00" closeTimeout="00:10:00"> <readerQuotas maxBytesPerRead="2147483647" maxArrayLength="2147483647" maxStringContentLength="2147483647"/> </binding> </basicHttpBinding> </bindings> <services> <service behaviorConfiguration="WcfPortalBehavior" name="Csla.Server.Hosts.Silverlight.WcfPortal"> <endpoint address="" binding="basicHttpBinding" contract="Csla.Server.Hosts.Silverlight.IWcfPortal" bindingConfiguration="BasicHttpBinding_IWcfPortal"> </endpoint> <endpoint address="mex" binding="mexHttpBinding" contract="IMetadataExchange"/> </service> </services> </system.serviceModel> Can anybody shed some light on what's going on and how to fix it? Thanks! Craig

  Read the article

• How to make custom WCF error handler return JSON response with non-OK http code?

  - by John

  I'm implementing a RESTful web service using WCF and the WebHttpBinding. Currently I'm working on the error handling logic, implementing a custom error handler (IErrorHandler); the aim is to have it catch any uncaught exceptions thrown by operations and then return a JSON error object (including say an error code and error message - e.g. { "errorCode": 123, "errorMessage": "bla" }) back to the browser user along with an an HTTP code such as BadRequest, InteralServerError or whatever (anything other than 'OK' really). Here is the code I am using inside the ProvideFault method of my error handler: fault = Message.CreateMessage(version, "", errorObject, new DataContractJsonSerializer(typeof(ErrorMessage))); var wbf = new WebBodyFormatMessageProperty(WebContentFormat.Json); fault.Properties.Add(WebBodyFormatMessageProperty.Name, wbf); var rmp = new HttpResponseMessageProperty(); rmp.StatusCode = System.Net.HttpStatusCode.InternalServerError; rmp.Headers.Add(HttpRequestHeader.ContentType, "application/json"); fault.Properties.Add(HttpResponseMessageProperty.Name, rmp); -- This returns with Content-Type: application/json, however the status code is 'OK' instead of 'InternalServerError'. fault = Message.CreateMessage(version, "", errorObject, new DataContractJsonSerializer(typeof(ErrorMessage))); var wbf = new WebBodyFormatMessageProperty(WebContentFormat.Json); fault.Properties.Add(WebBodyFormatMessageProperty.Name, wbf); var rmp = new HttpResponseMessageProperty(); rmp.StatusCode = System.Net.HttpStatusCode.InternalServerError; //rmp.Headers.Add(HttpRequestHeader.ContentType, "application/json"); fault.Properties.Add(HttpResponseMessageProperty.Name, rmp); -- This returns with the correct status code, however the content-type is now XML. fault = Message.CreateMessage(version, "", errorObject, new DataContractJsonSerializer(typeof(ErrorMessage))); var wbf = new WebBodyFormatMessageProperty(WebContentFormat.Json); fault.Properties.Add(WebBodyFormatMessageProperty.Name, wbf); var response = WebOperationContext.Current.OutgoingResponse; response.ContentType = "application/json"; response.StatusCode = HttpStatusCode.InternalServerError; -- This returns with the correct status code and the correct content-type! The problem is that the http body now has the text 'Failed to load source for: http://localhost:7000/bla..' instead of the actual JSON data.. Any ideas? I'm considering using the last approach and just sticking the JSON in the HTTP StatusMessage header field instead of in the body, but this doesn't seem quite as nice?

  Read the article

• WCF App using Peer Chat app as example does not work.

  - by splate

  I converted a VB .Net 3.5 app to use peer to peer WCF using the available Microsoft example of the Chat app. I made sure that I copied the app.config file for the sample(modified the names for my app), added the appropriate references. I followed all the tutorials and added the appropriate tags and structure in my app code. Everything runs without any errors, but the clients only get messages from themselves and not from the other clients. The sample chat application does run just fine with multiple clients. The only difference I could find is that the server on the sample is targeting the framework 2.0, but I assume that is wrong and it is building it in at least 3.0 or the System.ServiceModel reference would break. Is there something that has to be registered that the sample is doing behind the scenes or is the sample a special project type? I am confused. My next step is to copy all my classes and logic from my app to the sample app, but that is likely a lot of work. Here is my Client App.config: <client><endpoint name="thldmEndPoint" address="net.p2p://thldmMesh/thldmServer" binding="netPeerTcpBinding" bindingConfiguration="PeerTcpConfig" contract="THLDM_Client.IGameService"></endpoint></client> <bindings><netPeerTcpBinding> <binding name="PeerTcpConfig" port="0"> <security mode="None"></security> <resolver mode="Custom"> <custom address="net.tcp://localhost/thldmServer" binding="netTcpBinding" bindingConfiguration="TcpConfig"></custom> </resolver> </binding></netPeerTcpBinding> <netTcpBinding> <binding name="TcpConfig"> <security mode="None"></security> </binding> </netTcpBinding> </bindings> Here is my server App.config: <services> <service name="System.ServiceModel.PeerResolvers.CustomPeerResolverService"> <host> <baseAddresses> <add baseAddress="net.tcp://localhost/thldmServer"/> </baseAddresses> </host> <endpoint address="net.tcp://localhost/thldmServer" binding="netTcpBinding" bindingConfiguration="TcpConfig" contract="System.ServiceModel.PeerResolvers.IPeerResolverContract"> </endpoint> </service> </services> <bindings> <netTcpBinding> <binding name="TcpConfig"> <security mode="None"></security> </binding> </netTcpBinding> </bindings> Thanks ahead of time.

  Read the article

• Why do I get a WCF timeout even though my service call and callback are successful?

  - by KallDrexx

  I'm playing around with hooking up an in-game console to a WCF interface, so an external application can send console commands and receive console output. To accomplish this I created the following service contracts: public interface IConsoleNetworkCallbacks { [OperationContract(IsOneWay = true)] void NewOutput(IEnumerable<string> text, string category); } [ServiceContract(SessionMode = SessionMode.Required, CallbackContract = typeof(IConsoleNetworkCallbacks))] public interface IConsoleInterface { [OperationContract] void ProcessInput(string input); [OperationContract] void ChangeCategory(string category); } On the server I implemented it with: public class ConsoleNetworkInterface : IConsoleInterface, IDisposable { public ConsoleNetworkInterface() { ConsoleManager.Instance.RegisterOutputUpdateHandler(OutputHandler); } public void Dispose() { ConsoleManager.Instance.UnregisterOutputHandler(OutputHandler); } public void ProcessInput(string input) { ConsoleManager.Instance.ProcessInput(input); } public void ChangeCategory(string category) { ConsoleManager.Instance.UnregisterOutputHandler(OutputHandler); ConsoleManager.Instance.RegisterOutputUpdateHandler(OutputHandler, category); } protected void OutputHandler(IEnumerable<string> text, string category) { var callbacks = OperationContext.Current.GetCallbackChannel<IConsoleNetworkCallbacks>(); callbacks.NewOutput(text, category); } } On the client I implemented the callback with: public class Callbacks : IConsoleNetworkCallbacks { public void NewOutput(IEnumerable<string> text, string category) { MessageBox.Show(string.Format("{0} lines received for '{1}' category", text.Count(), category)); } } Finally, I establish the service host with the following class: public class ConsoleServiceHost : IDisposable { protected ServiceHost _host; public ConsoleServiceHost() { _host = new ServiceHost(typeof(ConsoleNetworkInterface), new Uri[] { new Uri("net.pipe://localhost") }); _host.AddServiceEndpoint(typeof(IConsoleInterface), new NetNamedPipeBinding(), "FrbConsolePipe"); _host.Open(); } public void Dispose() { _host.Close(); } } and use the following code on my client to establish the connection: protected Callbacks _callbacks; protected IConsoleInterface _proxy; protected void ConnectToConsoleServer() { _callbacks = new Callbacks(); var factory = new DuplexChannelFactory<IConsoleInterface>(_callbacks, new NetNamedPipeBinding(), new EndpointAddress("net.pipe://localhost/FrbConsolePipe")); _proxy = factory.CreateChannel(); _proxy.ProcessInput("Connected"); } So what happens is that my ConnectToConsoleServer() is called and then it gets all the way to _proxy.ProcessInput("Connected");. In my game (on the server) I immediately see the output caused by the ProcessInput call, but the client is still stalled on the _proxy.ProcessInput() call. After a minute my client gets a JIT TimeoutException however at the same time my MessageBox message appears. So obviously not only is my command being sent immediately, my callback is being correctly called. So why am I getting a timeout exception? Note: Even removing the MessageBox call, I still have this issue, so it's not an issue of the GUI blocking the callback response.

  Read the article

• Clients with multiple proxy and multithreading callbacks

  - by enzom83

  I created a sessionful web service using WCF, and in particular I used the NetTcpBinding binding. In addition to methods to initiate and terminate a session, other methods allow the client to send to one or more tasks to be performed (the results are returned via callback, so the service is duplex), but they also allow you to know the status of the service. Assuming you activate the same service on multiple endpoints, and assuming that the client knows these endpoints (for example, it could maintain a List of endpoints), the client should connect with one or more replicas of the same service. The client periodically updates the status of the service, so when it needs to perform a new task (the task is submitted by the user via UI), it selects the service currently less loaded and sends the task to it. Periodically, the client also initiates a maintenance procedure in order to disconnect from one or more overloaded service and in order to connect with new services. I created a client proxy using the svcutil tool. I wish each proxy can be used simultaneously by different threads, for example, in addition to the thread that submits the tasks using a proxy, there are also the following two threads which act periodically: a thread that periodically sends a request to the service in order to obtain the updated state; a thread that periodically selects a proxy to close and instantiates a new proxy to replace the closed one. To achieve these objectives, is it sufficient to create an array of proxies and manage their opening and closing in separate threads? I think I read that the proxy method calls are thread safe, so I would not need to perform a lock before requesting updates to the service. However, when the maintenance procedure (which is activated on its own thread) decides to close a proxy, should I perform a lock? Finally, each proxy is also associated with an object that implements the callback interface for the service: are the callbacks (invoked on the client) executed on different threads on the client? I would like to wrap the management of the proxy in one or more classes so that it can then easily manage within a WPF application.

  Read the article

< Previous Page | 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80  | Next Page >