Search Results

Search found 3630 results on 146 pages for 'wcf interoperability'.

Page 8/146 | < Previous Page | 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15  | Next Page >

• Invalid or expired security context token in WCF web service

  - by Damian

  All, I have a WCF web service (let's called service "B") hosted under IIS using a service account (VM, Windows 2003 SP2). The service exposes an endpoint that use WSHttpBinding with the default values except for maxReceivedMessageSize, maxBufferPoolSize, maxBufferSize and some of the time outs that have been increased. The web service has been load tested using Visual Studio Load Test framework with around 800 concurrent users and successfully passed all tests with no exceptions being thrown. The proxy in the unit test has been created from configuration. There is a sharepoint application that use the Office Sharepoint Server Search service to call web services "A" and "B". The application will get data from service "A" to create a request that will be sent to service "B". The response coming from service "B" is indexed for search. The proxy is created programmatically using the ChannelFactory. When service "A" takes less than 10 minutes, the calls to service "B" are successfull. But when service "A" takes more time (~20 minutes) the calls to service "B" throw the following exception: Exception Message: An unsecured or incorrectly secured fault was received from the other party. See the inner FaultException for the fault code and detail Inner Exception Message: The message could not be processed. This is most likely because the action 'namespace/OperationName' is incorrect or because the message contains an invalid or expired security context token or because there is a mismatch between bindings. The security context token would be invalid if the service aborted the channel due to inactivity. To prevent the service from aborting idle sessions prematurely increase the Receive timeout on the service endpoint's binding. The binding settings are the same, the time in both client server and web service server are synchronize with the Windows Time service, same time zone. When i look at the server where web service "B" is hosted i can see the following security errors being logged: Source: Security Category: Logon/Logoff Event ID: 537 User NT AUTHORITY\SYSTEM Logon Failure: Reason: An error occurred during logon Logon Type: 3 Logon Process: Kerberos Authentication Package: Kerberos Status code: 0xC000006D Substatus code: 0xC0000133 After reading some of the blogs online, the Status code means STATUS_LOGON_FAILURE and the substatus code means STATUS_TIME_DIFFERENCE_AT_DC. but i already checked both server and client clocks and they are syncronized. I also noticed that the security token seems to be cached somewhere in the client server because they have another process that calls the web service "B" using the same service account and successfully gets data the first time is called. Then they start the proccess to update the office sharepoint server search service indexes and it fails. Then if they called the first proccess again it will fail too. Has anyone experienced this type of problems or have any ideas? Regards, --Damian

  Read the article

• Do not use “using” in WCF Client

  - by oazabir

  You know that any IDisposable object must be disposed using using. So, you have been using using to wrap WCF service’s ChannelFactory and Clients like this: using(var client = new SomeClient()) {. ..} Or, if you are doing it the hard and slow way (without really knowing why), then: using(var factory = new ChannelFactory<ISomeService>()) {var channel= factory.CreateChannel();...} That’s what we have all learnt in school right? We have learnt it wrong! When there’s a network related error or the connection is broken, or the call is timed out before Dispose is called by the using keyword, then it results in the following exception when the using keyword tries to dispose the channel: failed: System.ServiceModel.CommunicationObjectFaultedException : The communication object, System.ServiceModel.Channels.ServiceChannel, cannot be used for communication because it is in the Faulted state. Server stack trace: at System.ServiceModel.Channels.CommunicationObject.Close(TimeSpan timeout) Exception rethrown at [0]: at System.Runtime.Remoting.Proxies.RealProxy.HandleReturnMessage(IMessage reqMsg, IMessage retMsg) at System.Runtime.Remoting.Proxies.RealProxy.PrivateInvoke(MessageData& msgData, Int32 type) at System.ServiceModel.ICommunicationObject.Close(TimeSpan timeout) at System.ServiceModel.ClientBase`1.System.ServiceModel.ICommunicationObject.Close(TimeSpan timeout) at System.ServiceModel.ClientBase`1.Close() at System.ServiceModel.ClientBase`1.System.IDisposable.Dispose() There are various reasons for which the underlying connection can be at broken state before the using block is completed and the .Dispose() is called. Common problems like network connection dropping, IIS doing an app pool recycle at that moment, some proxy sitting between you and the service dropping the connection for various reasons and so on. The point is, it might seem like a corner case, but it’s a likely corner case. If you are building a highly available client, you need to treat this properly before you go-live. So, do NOT use using on WCF Channel/Client/ChannelFactory. Instead you need to use an alternative. Here’s what you can do: First create an extension method. public static class WcfExtensions{ public static void Using<T>(this T client, Action<T> work) where T : ICommunicationObject { try { work(client); client.Close(); } catch (CommunicationException e) { client.Abort(); } catch (TimeoutException e) { client.Abort(); } catch (Exception e) { client.Abort(); throw; } }} Then use this instead of the using keyword: new SomeClient().Using(channel => { channel.Login(username, password);}); Or if you are using ChannelFactory then: new ChannelFactory<ISomeService>().Using(channel => { channel.Login(username, password);}); Enjoy!

  Read the article

• Callback Contract in WCF

  Callback contracts are a very powerful concept that is easily implemented in WCF. Using this, it is very easy to achieve event-like behavior between a service and client (duplex operations).

  Read the article

• WCF Test Client Service Failed to Invoke

  - by renjucool

  I'm connection IBM.Iseries database in a c# application using ADO.NET iSeries drivers. My WCF service is throwing the error as "HTTP could not register URL http://+:80/Temporary_Listen_Addresses/771be107-8fa3-46f9-ac01-12c4d503d01e/ because TCP port 80 is being used by another application." <system.serviceModel> <client> <endpoint address="http://localhost:8080/Design_Time_Addresses/DataAccessLayer/POEngine/" binding="wsDualHttpBinding" bindingConfiguration="" contract="POServiceReference.IPOEngine" name="MyPoBindings"> <identity> <dns value="localhost" /> </identity> </endpoint> <endpoint address="http://localhost:8080/Design_Time_Addresses/DataAccessLayer/POEngine/" binding="wsDualHttpBinding" bindingConfiguration="PoBindings1" contract="POServiceReference.IPOEngine" name="PoBindings"> <identity> <dns value="localhost" /> </identity> </endpoint> </client> <bindings> <wsDualHttpBinding> <binding name="PoBindings1" closeTimeout="00:01:00" openTimeout="00:01:00" receiveTimeout="00:10:00" sendTimeout="00:01:00" bypassProxyOnLocal="false" transactionFlow="false" hostNameComparisonMode="StrongWildcard" maxBufferPoolSize="524288" maxReceivedMessageSize="65536" messageEncoding="Text" textEncoding="utf-8" useDefaultWebProxy="true"> <readerQuotas maxDepth="32" maxStringContentLength="8192" maxArrayLength="16384" maxBytesPerRead="4096" maxNameTableCharCount="16384" /> <reliableSession ordered="true" inactivityTimeout="00:10:00" /> <security mode="Message"> <message clientCredentialType="Windows" negotiateServiceCredential="true" algorithmSuite="Default" /> </security> </binding> </wsDualHttpBinding> <wsHttpBinding> <binding name="PoBindings" /> </wsHttpBinding> </bindings> <services> <service behaviorConfiguration="DataAccessLayer.POEngineBehavior" name="DataAccessLayer.POEngine"> <endpoint address="" binding="wsDualHttpBinding" bindingConfiguration="" name="PoBindings" contract="DataAccessLayer.IPOEngine"> <identity> <dns value="localhost" /> </identity> </endpoint> <endpoint address="mex" binding="mexHttpBinding" contract="IMetadataExchange" /> <host> <baseAddresses> <add baseAddress="http://localhost:8080/Design_Time_Addresses/DataAccessLayer/POEngine/" /> </baseAddresses> </host> </service> </services> <behaviors> <endpointBehaviors> <behavior name="NewBehavior" /> </endpointBehaviors> <serviceBehaviors> <behavior name="DataAccessLayer.Service1Behavior"> <serviceMetadata httpGetEnabled="true" /> <serviceDebug includeExceptionDetailInFaults="false" /> </behavior> <behavior name="DataAccessLayer.POEngineBehavior"> <serviceMetadata httpGetEnabled="true" /> <serviceDebug includeExceptionDetailInFaults="false" /> </behavior> </serviceBehaviors> </behaviors> </system.serviceModel> Having the problem also without using any IBM data access. A normal Hello World is also throwing the error.Where i need to change the port address

  Read the article

• ADO.NET (WCF) Data Services Query Interceptor Hangs IIS

  - by PreMagination

  I have an ADO.NET Data Service that's supposed to provide read-only access to a somewhat complex database. Logically I have table-per-type (TPT) inheritance in my data model but the EDM doesn't implement inheritance. (Limitation of EF and navigation properties on derived types. STILL not fixed in EF4!) I can query my EDM directly (using a separate project) using a copy of the query I'm trying to run against the web service, results are returned within 10 seconds. Disabling the query interceptors I'm able to make the same query against the web service, results are returned similarly quickly. I can enable some of the query interceptors and the results are returned slowly, up to a minute or so later. Alternatively, I can enable all the query interceptors, expand less of the properties on the main object I'm querying, and results are returned in a similar period of time. (I've increased some of the timeout periods) Up til this point Sql Profiler indicates the slow-down is the database. (That's a post for a different day) But when I enable all my query interceptors and expand all the properties I'd like to have the IIS worker process pegs the CPU for 20 minutes and a query is never even made against the database. This implies to me that yes, my implementation probably sucks but regardless the Data Services "tier" is having an issue it shouldn't. WCF tracing didn't reveal anything interesting to my untrained eye. Details: Data model: Agent-Person-Student Student has a collection of referrals Students and referrals are private, queries against the web service should only return "your" students and referrals. This means Person and Agent need to be filtered too. Other entities (Agent-Organization-School) can be accessed by anyone who has authenticated. The existing security model is poorly suited to perform this type of filtering for this type of data access, the query interceptors are complicated and cause EF to generate some entertaining sql queries. Sample Interceptor [QueryInterceptor("Agents")] public Expression<Func<Agent, Boolean>> OnQueryAgents() { //Agent is a Person(1), Educator(2), Student(3), or Other Person(13); allow if scope permissions exist return ag => (ag.AgentType.AgentTypeId == 1 || ag.AgentType.AgentTypeId == 2 || ag.AgentType.AgentTypeId == 3 || ag.AgentType.AgentTypeId == 13) && ag.Person.OrganizationPersons.Count<OrganizationPerson>(op => op.Organization.ScopePermissions.Any<ScopePermission> (p => p.ApplicationRoleAccount.Account.UserName == HttpContext.Current.User.Identity.Name && p.ApplicationRoleAccount.Application.ApplicationId == 124) || op.Organization.HierarchyDescendents.Any<OrganizationsHierarchy>(oh => oh.AncestorOrganization.ScopePermissions.Any<ScopePermission> (p => p.ApplicationRoleAccount.Account.UserName == HttpContext.Current.User.Identity.Name && p.ApplicationRoleAccount.Application.ApplicationId == 124))) > 0; } The query interceptors for Person, Student, Referral are all very similar, ie they traverse multiple same/similar tables to look for ScopePermissions as above. Sample Query var referrals = (from r in service.Referrals .Expand("Organization/ParentOrganization") .Expand("Educator/Person/Agent") .Expand("Student/Person/Agent") .Expand("Student") .Expand("Grade") .Expand("ProblemBehavior") .Expand("Location") .Expand("Motivation") .Expand("AdminDecision") .Expand("OthersInvolved") where r.DateCreated >= coupledays && r.DateDeleted == null select r); Any suggestions or tips would be greatly associated, for fixing my current implementation or in developing a new one, with the caveat that the database can't be changed and that ultimately I need to expose a large portion of the database via a web service that limits data access to the data authorized for, for the purpose of data integration with multiple outside parties. THANK YOU!!!

  Read the article

• Strange exception when connecting to a WCF service via a proxy server

  - by Slauma

  The exception "This operation is not supported for a relative URI." occurs in the following situation: I have a WCF service: [ServiceContract(ProtectionLevel=ProtectionLevel.None)] public interface IMyService { [OperationContract] [FaultContract(typeof(MyFault))] List<MyDto> MyOperation(int param); // other operations } public class MyService : IMyService { public List<MyDto> MyOperation(int param) { // Do the business stuff and return a list of MyDto } // other implementations } MyFault and MyDto are two very simple classes marked with [DataContract] attribute and each only having three [DataMember] of type string, int and int?. This service is hosted in IIS 7.0 on a Win 2008 Server along with an ASP.NET application. I am using an SVC file MyService.svc which is located directly in the root of the web site. The service configuration in web.config is the following: <system.serviceModel> <services> <service name="MyServiceLib.MyService"> <endpoint address="" binding="wsHttpBinding" bindingConfiguration="wsHttpBindingConfig" contract="MyServiceLib.IMyService" /> </service> </services> <bindings> <wsHttpBinding> <binding name="wsHttpBindingConfig"> <security mode="None"> <transport clientCredentialType="None" /> </security> </binding> </wsHttpBinding> </bindings> <behaviors> <serviceBehaviors> <behavior> <serviceMetadata httpGetEnabled="false"/> <serviceDebug includeExceptionDetailInFaults="false" /> </behavior> </serviceBehaviors> </behaviors> </system.serviceModel> This seems to work so far as I can enter the address http://www.domain.com/MyService.svc in a browser and get the "This is a Windows Communication Foundation Service"-Welcome page. One of the clients consuming the service is a console application: MyServiceClient aChannel = new MyServiceClient("WSHttpBinding_IMyService"); List<MyDto> aMyDtoList = aChannel.MyOperation(1); It has the following configuration: <system.serviceModel> <bindings> <wsHttpBinding> <binding name="WSHttpBinding_IMyService" closeTimeout="00:01:00" openTimeout="00:01:00" receiveTimeout="00:10:00" sendTimeout="00:01:00" bypassProxyOnLocal="true" transactionFlow="false" hostNameComparisonMode="StrongWildcard" maxBufferPoolSize="524288" maxReceivedMessageSize="65536" messageEncoding="Text" textEncoding="utf-8" useDefaultWebProxy="false" proxyAddress="10.20.30.40:8080" allowCookies="false"> <readerQuotas maxDepth="32" maxStringContentLength="8192" maxArrayLength="16384" maxBytesPerRead="4096" maxNameTableCharCount="16384" /> <reliableSession ordered="true" inactivityTimeout="00:10:00" enabled="false" /> <security mode="None"> <transport clientCredentialType="Windows" proxyCredentialType="None" realm="" /> <message clientCredentialType="Windows" negotiateServiceCredential="true" /> </security> </binding> </wsHttpBinding> </bindings> <client> <endpoint address="http://www.domain.com/MyService.svc" binding="wsHttpBinding" bindingConfiguration="WSHttpBinding_IMyService" contract="MyService.IMyService" name="WSHttpBinding_IMyService" /> </client> </system.serviceModel> When I run this application at a production server at a customer site calling aChannel.MyOperation(1) throws the following exception: This operation is not supported for a relative URI. When I run this client application on my development PC with exactly the same config, with the exception that I remove proxyAddress="10.20.30.40:8080" from the bindings the operation works without problems. Now I really don't know what specifying a proxy server address might have to do with absolute or relative URIs. The use of the proxy server or not is the only difference I can see when running the client on the production or on the development machine. Does someone have an idea what this exception might mean in this context and how possibly to solve the problem? Thank you in advance for help!

  Read the article

• Trying to run WCF web service on non-domain VM, Security Errors

  - by NealWalters

  Am I in a Catch-22 situation here? My goal is to take a WCF service that I inherited, and run it on a VM and test it by calling it from my desktop PC. The VM is in a workgroup, and not in the company's domain. Basically, we need more test environments, ideally one per developer (we may have 2 to 4 people that need this). Thus the idea of the VM was that each developer could have his own web server that somewhat matches or real environment (where we actually have two websites, an external/exposed and internal). [Using VS2010 .NET 4.0] In the internal service, each method was decorated with this attribute: [OperationBehavior(Impersonation = ImpersonationOption.Required)] I'm still researching why this was needed. I think it's because a webapp calls the "internal" service, and either a) we need the credentials of the user, or b) we may doing some PrinciplePermission.Demands to see if the user is in a group. My interest is creating some ConsoleTest programs or UnitTest programs. I changed to allowed like this: [OperationBehavior(Impersonation = ImpersonationOption.Allowed)] because I was getting this error in trying to view the .svc in the browser: The contract operation 'EditAccountFamily' requires Windows identity for automatic impersonation. A Windows identity that represents the caller is not provided by binding ('WSHttpBinding','http://tempuri.org/') for contract ('IAdminService','http://tempuri.org/'. I don't get that error with the original bindings look like this: However, I believe I need to turn off this security since the web service is not on the domain. I tend to get these errors in the client: 1) The request for security token could not be satisfied because authentication failed - as an InnerException of "SecurityNegotiation was unhandled". or 2) The caller was not authenticated by the service as an InnerException of "SecurityNegotiation was unhandled". So can I create some configuration of code and web.config that will allow each developer to work on his own VM? Or must I join the VM to the domain? The number of permutations seems near endless. I've started to create a Word.doc that says what to do with each error, but now I'm in the catch-22 where I'm stuck. Thanks, Neal Server Bindings: <bindings> <wsHttpBinding> <binding name="wsHttpEndpointBinding" maxBufferPoolSize="2147483647" maxReceivedMessageSize="500000000"> <readerQuotas maxDepth="2147483647" maxStringContentLength="2147483647" maxArrayLength="2147483647" maxBytesPerRead="2147483647" maxNameTableCharCount="2147483647" /> <!-- <security mode="None" /> This is one thing I tried --> <security> <message clientCredentialType="Windows" /> </security> </binding> </wsHttpBinding> </bindings> <behaviors> <serviceBehaviors> <behavior name="ABC.AdminService.AdminServiceBehavior"> <!-- To avoid disclosing metadata information, set the value below to false and remove the metadata endpoint above before deployment --> <serviceMetadata httpGetEnabled="true" /> <!-- To receive exception details in faults for debugging purposes, set the value below to true. Set to false before deployment to avoid disclosing exception information --> <serviceDebug includeExceptionDetailInFaults="true" /> <serviceCredentials> </serviceCredentials> <!--<serviceAuthorization principalPermissionMode="UseAspNetRoles" roleProviderName="AspNetWindowsTokenRoleProvider"/>--> <serviceAuthorization principalPermissionMode="UseWindowsGroups" impersonateCallerForAllOperations="true" /> </behavior> <behavior name="ABC.AdminService.IAdminServiceTransportBehavior"> <!-- To avoid disclosing metadata information, set the value below to false and remove the metadata endpoint above before deployment --> <serviceMetadata httpGetEnabled="true" /> <!-- To receive exception details in faults for debugging purposes, set the value below to true. Set to false before deployment to avoid disclosing exception information --> <serviceDebug includeExceptionDetailInFaults="false" /> <serviceCredentials> <clientCertificate> <authentication certificateValidationMode="PeerTrust" /> </clientCertificate> <serviceCertificate findValue="WCfServer" storeLocation="LocalMachine" storeName="My" x509FindType="FindBySubjectName" /> </serviceCredentials> </behavior> </serviceBehaviors> </behaviors> <serviceHostingEnvironment multipleSiteBindingsEnabled="true" /> CLIENT: <system.serviceModel> <bindings> <wsHttpBinding> <binding name="WSHttpBinding_IAdminService" closeTimeout="00:01:00" openTimeout="00:01:00" receiveTimeout="00:10:00" sendTimeout="00:01:00" bypassProxyOnLocal="false" transactionFlow="false" hostNameComparisonMode="StrongWildcard" maxBufferPoolSize="524288" maxReceivedMessageSize="65536" messageEncoding="Text" textEncoding="utf-8" useDefaultWebProxy="true" allowCookies="false"> <readerQuotas maxDepth="32" maxStringContentLength="8192" maxArrayLength="16384" maxBytesPerRead="4096" maxNameTableCharCount="16384" /> <reliableSession ordered="true" inactivityTimeout="00:10:00" enabled="false" /> <security mode="Message"> <transport clientCredentialType="Windows" proxyCredentialType="None" realm="" /> <message clientCredentialType="Windows" negotiateServiceCredential="true" algorithmSuite="Default" /> </security> </binding> </wsHttpBinding> </bindings> <client> <endpoint address="http://192.168.159.132/EC_AdminService/AdminService.svc" binding="wsHttpBinding" bindingConfiguration="WSHttpBinding_IAdminService" contract="svcRef.IAdminService" name="WSHttpBinding_IAdminService"> <identity> <dns value="localhost" /> </identity> </endpoint> </client> </system.serviceModel>

  Read the article

• WCF interoperability binding for duplex communication?

  - by mt_serg

  I have a wcf sevice and silverlight client. My contract has callbacks and therefore I implement PollingDuplexHttpBinding. Now, I want connect to wcf service from java or c++ code. What binding should I add to service config ?

  Read the article

• Set username credential for a new channel without creating a new factory

  - by Ramon

  I have a backend service and front-end services. They communicate via the trusted subsystem pattern. I want to transfer a username from the frontend to the backend and do this via username credentials as found here: http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms730288.aspx This does not work in our scenerio where the front-end builds a backend service channel factory via: channelFactory = new ChannelFactory<IBackEndService>(.....); Creating a new channel is done via die channel factory. I can only set the credentials one time after that I get an exception that the username object is read-only. channelFactory.Credentials.Username.Username = "myCoolFrontendUser"; var channel = channelFactory.CreateChannel(); Is there a way to create the channel factory only one time as this is expensive to create and then specify username credential when creating a channel?

  Read the article

• Setting custom behaviour via .config file - why doesn't this work?

  - by Andrew Shepherd

  I am attempting to insert a custom behavior into my service client, following the example here. I appear to be following all of the steps, but I am getting a ConfigurationErrorsException. Is there anyone more experienced than me who can spot what I'm doing wrong? Here is the entire app.config file. <?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8" ?> <configuration> <system.serviceModel> <behaviors> <endpointBehaviors> <behavior name="ClientLoggingEndpointBehaviour"> <myLoggerExtension /> </behavior> </endpointBehaviors> </behaviors> <extensions> <behaviorExtensions> <add name="myLoggerExtension" type="ChatClient.ClientLoggingEndpointBehaviourExtension, ChatClient, Version=0.0.0.0, Culture=neutral, PublicKeyToken=null"/> </behaviorExtensions> </extensions> <bindings> </bindings> <client> <endpoint behaviorConfiguration="ClientLoggingEndpointBehaviour" name="ChatRoomClientEndpoint" address="http://localhost:8016/ChatRoom" binding="wsDualHttpBinding" contract="ChatRoomLib.IChatRoom" /> </client> </system.serviceModel> </configuration> Here is the exception message: An error occurred creating the configuration section handler for system.serviceModel/behaviors: Extension element 'myLoggerExtension' cannot be added to this element. Verify that the extension is registered in the extension collection at system.serviceModel/extensions/behaviorExtensions. Parameter name: element (C:\Documents and Settings\Andrew Shepherd\My Documents\Visual Studio 2008\Projects\WcfPractice\ChatClient\bin\Debug\ChatClient.vshost.exe.config line 5) I know that I've correctly written the reference to the ClientLoggingEndpointBehaviourExtensionobject, because through the debugger I can see it being instantiated.

  Read the article

• Standards Matter: The Battle For Interoperability Continues

  - by michael.rowell

  Great Article, although it is a little dated at this point. Information Week Article Standards Matter: The Battle for Interoperability goes on Summary If you're guilty of relegating standards support to a "nice to have" feature rather than a requirement, you're part of the problem. If you want products to interoperate, be prepared to walk away if a vendor can't prove compliance. Don't be brushed off with promises of standards support "on the road map." The alternative is vendor lock-in and higher costs, including the cost of maintaining systems that don't work together. Standards bodies are imperfect and must do better. The alternative: splintered networks and broken promises. The point: "The secret sauce to a successful 'working standard' isn't necessarily IETF or another longstanding body," says Jonathan Feldman, director of IT services for the city of Asheville, N.C., and an InformationWeek Analytics contributor. "Rather, an earnest and honest effort by a group that has governance outside of a single corporation's control is what's important." In order to have true interoperability vendors as well as customers must be actively engaged in the standards process. Vendors must be willing to truly work together and not be protecting an existing product. Customers must also be willing to truly to work together and not be demanding a solution that only meets their needs but instead meets the needs of all participants. Ultimately, customers must be willing to reward vendor compliance by requiring compliance in products and services that they purchase and deploy. Managers that deploy systems without compliance to standards are only hurting themselves. Standards do matter. When developed openly and deployed compliantly standards deliver interoperability which provides solid business value.

  Read the article

• Fix: WCF - The type provided as the Service attribute value in the ServiceHost directive could not

  - by Ken Cox [MVP]

  I wanted to expose some raw data to users in my current ASP.NET 3.5 web site project. I created a subdirectory called ‘datafeeds’ and added a WCF Data Service. I wired the dataservice up to the Entity Framework class and, on running the ItemDataService.svc file, was greeted with: The type  <> provided as the Service attribute value in the ServiceHost directive could not be found So why couldn’t it find the class? It was right there in the… oops! Instead of putting the ItemDataService.vb...(read more)

  Read the article

• Getting WCF Bindings and Behaviors from any config source

  - by cibrax

  The need of loading WCF bindings or behaviors from different sources such as files in a disk or databases is a common requirement when dealing with configuration either on the client side or the service side. The traditional way to accomplish this in WCF is loading everything from the standard configuration section (serviceModel section) or creating all the bindings and behaviors by hand in code. However, there is a solution in the middle that becomes handy when more flexibility is needed. This solution involves getting the configuration from any place, and use that configuration to automatically configure any existing binding or behavior instance created with code.  In order to configure a binding instance (System.ServiceModel.Channels.Binding) that you later inject in any endpoint on the client channel or the service host, you first need to get a binding configuration section from any configuration file (you can generate a temp file on the fly if you are using any other source for storing the configuration).  private BindingsSection GetBindingsSection(string path) { System.Configuration.Configuration config = System.Configuration.ConfigurationManager.OpenMappedExeConfiguration( new System.Configuration.ExeConfigurationFileMap() { ExeConfigFilename = path }, System.Configuration.ConfigurationUserLevel.None); var serviceModel = ServiceModelSectionGroup.GetSectionGroup(config); return serviceModel.Bindings; }   The BindingsSection contains a list of all the configured bindings in the serviceModel configuration section, so you can iterate through all the configured binding that get the one you need (You don’t need to have a complete serviceModel section, a section with the bindings only works).  public Binding ResolveBinding(string name) { BindingsSection section = GetBindingsSection(path); foreach (var bindingCollection in section.BindingCollections) { if (bindingCollection.ConfiguredBindings.Count > 0 && bindingCollection.ConfiguredBindings[0].Name == name) { var bindingElement = bindingCollection.ConfiguredBindings[0]; var binding = (Binding)Activator.CreateInstance(bindingCollection.BindingType); binding.Name = bindingElement.Name; bindingElement.ApplyConfiguration(binding); return binding; } } return null; }   The code above does just that, and also instantiates and configures the Binding object (System.ServiceModel.Channels.Binding) you are looking for. As you can see, the binding configuration element contains a method “ApplyConfiguration” that receives the binding instance that needs to be configured. A similar thing can be done for instance with the “Endpoint” behaviors. You first get the BehaviorsSection, and then, the behavior you want to use.  private BehaviorsSection GetBehaviorsSection(string path) { System.Configuration.Configuration config = System.Configuration.ConfigurationManager.OpenMappedExeConfiguration( new System.Configuration.ExeConfigurationFileMap() { ExeConfigFilename = path }, System.Configuration.ConfigurationUserLevel.None); var serviceModel = ServiceModelSectionGroup.GetSectionGroup(config); return serviceModel.Behaviors; }public List<IEndpointBehavior> ResolveEndpointBehavior(string name) { BehaviorsSection section = GetBehaviorsSection(path); List<IEndpointBehavior> endpointBehaviors = new List<IEndpointBehavior>(); if (section.EndpointBehaviors.Count > 0 && section.EndpointBehaviors[0].Name == name) { var behaviorCollectionElement = section.EndpointBehaviors[0]; foreach (BehaviorExtensionElement behaviorExtension in behaviorCollectionElement) { object extension = behaviorExtension.GetType().InvokeMember("CreateBehavior", BindingFlags.InvokeMethod | BindingFlags.NonPublic | BindingFlags.Instance, null, behaviorExtension, null); endpointBehaviors.Add((IEndpointBehavior)extension); } return endpointBehaviors; } return null; }   In this case, the code for creating the behavior instance is more tricky. First of all, a behavior in the configuration section actually represents a set of “IEndpoint” behaviors, and the behavior element you get from the configuration does not have any public method to configure an existing behavior instance. This last one only contains a protected method “CreateBehavior” that you can use for that purpose. Once you get this code implemented, a client channel can be easily configured as follows  var binding = resolver.ResolveBinding("MyBinding"); var behaviors = resolver.ResolveEndpointBehavior("MyBehavior"); SampleServiceClient client = new SampleServiceClient(binding, new EndpointAddress(new Uri("http://localhost:13749/SampleService.svc"), new DnsEndpointIdentity("localhost"))); foreach (var behavior in behaviors) { if(client.Endpoint.Behaviors.Contains(behavior.GetType())) { client.Endpoint.Behaviors.Remove(behavior.GetType()); } client.Endpoint.Behaviors.Add(behavior); }   The code above assumes that a configuration file (in any place) with a binding “MyBinding” and a behavior “MyBehavior” exists. That file can look like this,  <system.serviceModel> <bindings> <basicHttpBinding> <binding name="MyBinding"> <security mode="Transport"></security> </binding> </basicHttpBinding> </bindings> <behaviors> <endpointBehaviors> <behavior name="MyBehavior"> <clientCredentials> <windows/> </clientCredentials> </behavior> </endpointBehaviors> </behaviors> </system.serviceModel>   The same thing can be done of course in the service host if you want to manually configure the bindings and behaviors.  

  Read the article

• What are Silverlight, WCF RIA services or applications?

  - by Pankaj Upadhyay

  I asked a question here on programmers yesterday about learning HTML & CSS and the community was pretty generous to provide great answers. One of the answers was given by Emmad Kareem and that was : "if you can't do HTML, don't give up. Consider using Silverlight". This answer made me visit Silverlight.net and I came across the terms WCF RIA Services, Silverlight applications. After going through the website and some articles on website i am unable to draw a conclusive understanding on what this is all about. Is this another way of building websites using .NET, and is just like another framework like ASP.NET MVC3. What scenario's and requirements are basically targeted to silverlight applications or we are free to use either of Asp.net MVC or Silverlight in any web-application requirements.

  Read the article

• Making your WCF Web Apis to speak in multiple languages

  - by cibrax

  One of the key aspects of how the web works today is content negotiation. The idea of content negotiation is based on the fact that a single resource can have multiple representations, so user agents (or clients) and servers can work together to chose one of them. The http specification defines several “Accept” headers that a client can use to negotiate content with a server, and among all those, there is one for restricting the set of natural languages that are preferred as a response to a request, “Accept-Language”. For example, a client can specify “es” in this header for specifying that he prefers to receive the content in spanish or “en” in english. However, there are certain scenarios where the “Accept-Language” header is just not enough, and you might want to have a way to pass the “accepted” language as part of the resource url as an extension. For example, http://localhost/ProductCatalog/Products/1.es” returns all the descriptions for the product with id “1” in spanish. This is useful for scenarios in which you want to embed the link somewhere, such a document, an email or a page.  Supporting both scenarios, the header and the url extension, is really simple in the new WCF programming model. You only need to provide a processor implementation for any of them. Let’s say I have a resource implementation as part of a product catalog I want to expose with the WCF web apis. [ServiceContract][Export]public class ProductResource{ IProductRepository repository;  [ImportingConstructor] public ProductResource(IProductRepository repository) { this.repository = repository; }  [WebGet(UriTemplate = "{id}")] public Product Get(string id, HttpResponseMessage response) { var product = repository.GetById(int.Parse(id)); if (product == null) { response.StatusCode = HttpStatusCode.NotFound; response.Content = new StringContent(Messages.OrderNotFound); }  return product; }} The Get method implementation in this resource assumes the desired culture will be attached to the current thread (Thread.CurrentThread.Culture). Another option is to pass the desired culture as an additional argument in the method, so my processor implementation will handle both options. This method is also using an auto-generated class for handling string resources, Messages, which is available in the different cultures that the service implementation supports. For example, Messages.resx contains “OrderNotFound”: “Order Not Found” Messages.es.resx contains “OrderNotFound”: “No se encontro orden” The processor implementation bellow tackles the first scenario, in which the desired language is passed as part of the “Accept-Language” header. public class CultureProcessor : Processor<HttpRequestMessage, CultureInfo>{ string defaultLanguage = null;  public CultureProcessor(string defaultLanguage = "en") { this.defaultLanguage = defaultLanguage; this.InArguments[0].Name = HttpPipelineFormatter.ArgumentHttpRequestMessage; this.OutArguments[0].Name = "culture"; }  public override ProcessorResult<CultureInfo> OnExecute(HttpRequestMessage request) { CultureInfo culture = null; if (request.Headers.AcceptLanguage.Count > 0) { var language = request.Headers.AcceptLanguage.First().Value; culture = new CultureInfo(language); } else { culture = new CultureInfo(defaultLanguage); }  Thread.CurrentThread.CurrentCulture = culture; Messages.Culture = culture;  return new ProcessorResult<CultureInfo> { Output = culture }; }}   As you can see, the processor initializes a new CultureInfo instance with the value provided in the “Accept-Language” header, and set that instance to the current thread and the auto-generated resource class with all the messages. In addition, the CultureInfo instance is returned as an output argument called “culture”, making possible to receive that argument in any method implementation   The following code shows the implementation of the processor for handling languages as url extensions.   public class CultureExtensionProcessor : Processor<HttpRequestMessage, Uri>{ public CultureExtensionProcessor() { this.OutArguments[0].Name = HttpPipelineFormatter.ArgumentUri; }  public override ProcessorResult<Uri> OnExecute(HttpRequestMessage httpRequestMessage) { var requestUri = httpRequestMessage.RequestUri.OriginalString;  var extensionPosition = requestUri.LastIndexOf(".");  if (extensionPosition > -1) { var extension = requestUri.Substring(extensionPosition + 1);  var query = httpRequestMessage.RequestUri.Query;  requestUri = string.Format("{0}?{1}", requestUri.Substring(0, extensionPosition), query); ;  var uri = new Uri(requestUri);  httpRequestMessage.Headers.AcceptLanguage.Clear();  httpRequestMessage.Headers.AcceptLanguage.Add(new StringWithQualityHeaderValue(extension));  var result = new ProcessorResult<Uri>();  result.Output = uri;  return result; }  return new ProcessorResult<Uri>(); }} The last step is to inject both processors as part of the service configuration as it is shown bellow, public void RegisterRequestProcessorsForOperation(HttpOperationDescription operation, IList<Processor> processors, MediaTypeProcessorMode mode){ processors.Insert(0, new CultureExtensionProcessor()); processors.Add(new CultureProcessor());} Once you configured the two processors in the pipeline, your service will start speaking different languages :). Note: Url extensions don’t seem to be working in the current bits when you are using Url extensions in a base address. As far as I could see, ASP.NET intercepts the request first and tries to route the request to a registered ASP.NET Http Handler with that extension. For example, “http://localhost/ProductCatalog/products.es” does not work, but “http://localhost/ProductCatalog/products/1.es” does.

  Read the article

• Exposing business logic as WCF service

  - by Oren Schwartz

  I'm working on a middle-tier project which encapsulates the business logic (uses a DAL layer, and serves a web application server [ASP.net]) of a product deployed in a LAN. The BL serves as a bunch of services and data objects that are invoked upon user action. At present times, the DAL acts as a separate application whereas the BL uses it, but is consumed by the web application as a DLL. Both the DAL and the web application are deployed on different servers inside organization, and since the BL DLL is consumed by the web application, it resides in the same server. The worst thing about exposing the BL as a DLL is that we lost track with what we expose. Deployment is not such a big issue since mostly, product versions are deployed together. Would you recommend migrating from DLL to WCF service? If so, why? Do you know anyone who had a similar experience?

  Read the article

• Dictionary as DataMember in WCF after installing .NET 4.5 [migrated]

  - by Mauricio Ulate

  After installing .NET Framework 4.5 with Visual Studio 2012, whenever I want to obtain the reference from a WCF service, my dictionaries are changed into arrays. For example, Dictionary<int, double> is changed into ArrayOfKeyValueOfintdoubleKeyValueOfintdouble. This happens in both Visual Studio 2012 and 2010 (both Express). I've reviewed my configuration and the dictionary data type in the service reference configuration is System.Collection.Generic.Dictionary. Changing this doesn't make a difference. Reverting to just using Visual Studio 2010 and .NET 4.0 is not an option.

  Read the article

• What is the difference between WCF service and a simple Web service in developing using .NET Framework?

  - by Steve Johnson

  My questions are: What is the difference between WCF service and a simple Web service in .NET Framework? What a WCF Service can do which a .NET Web service cant? In other words, what are the limitation of .NET Web services which were overcome in WCF services? I understand that WCF are REST based and .NET web services are SOAP based. But I need to know more than that. How a developer will make a design decision whether to developer a Web service or a WCF service?

  Read the article

• WCF using ChannelFactory.CreateChannel with webHttp behavior

  - by BrettRobi

  I've got a simple REST based service for which I am trying to create a client proxy using ChannelFactory. I want to be without a configuration file so I am trying to do this in code and I believe I have everything I used to have in .config except for the behavior. Can anyone tell me how I can get this config into c# code: Here is the stripped down c# code I have now: var endpoint = new EndpointAddress(urlCommServer); var binding = new WebHttpBinding(); return ChannelFactory.CreateChannel(binding, endpoint);

  Read the article

• WCF service The maximum array length quota (16384) has been exceeded

  - by dmitry.baranovsky

  I have a wsf service and a client application. While trying to communicate the client and the service I've gotten the following message: "The formatter threw an exception while trying to deserialize the message: There was an error while trying to deserialize parameter http://tempuri.org/:blob. The InnerException message was 'There was an error deserializing the object of type FileBlob. The maximum array length quota (16384) has been exceeded while reading XML data. This quota may be increased by changing the MaxArrayLength property on the XmlDictionaryReaderQuotas object used when creating the XML reader. Line 1, position 25931.'. Please see InnerException for more details." I have the customBinding element and it doesn't allow me to insert "readerQuotas" section. In both the client and service configs I have the following binding element: <customBinding> <binding name="LicenseServiceBinding" closeTimeout="00:01:00" openTimeout="00:01:00" receiveTimeout="00:10:00" sendTimeout="00:01:00"> <security authenticationMode="UserNameOverTransport"> <localClientSettings maxClockSkew="00:07:00" /> <localServiceSettings maxClockSkew="00:07:00" /> </security> <windowsStreamSecurity /> <httpsTransport maxReceivedMessageSize="2147483646"/> </binding> </customBinding> Thanks in advance for any help:)

  Read the article

• Clear text username password authentication in Wcf over https

  - by Ismail S

  My question may be very silly but here it is. I went through this question. jassuncao has suggested to use custom binding created Yaron Naveh. Now that it is not a very secure way of authentication, my question is, what if I use Yaron's custom binding and put my service behind https? Will it still be unsecured?

  Read the article

• WCF Http Bindings, Require SSL

  - by JoshKraker

  I have the following binding I'm using with my wsHttpBinding webservice. <binding name="wsHttpConfig"> <security> <transport clientCredentialType="None"/> </security> </binding> The issue is that it allows for the client to connect using either Http or Https. I would like to require them to use SSL. I tried adding the following: <system.web.extensions> <scripting> <webServices> <authenticationService enabled="true" requireSSL = "true"/> </webServices> </scripting> </system.web.extensions> But it had no effect; client could still connect with Http. I then tried checking the "Require SSL" in the IIS7 SSL Settings and had client certificates radio set to Accept. Now, when I try to view the service I am getting the error "Could not find a base address that matches scheme http for the endpoint with binding WSHttpBinding. Registered base address schemes are [https]." Anyone know exactly how to fix this error? I have been googling for the last 3 hours trying 500 different combinations (not 500, but too many to list) and could not get anything to run.

  Read the article

• Consuming secured WCF service through basicHTTPbinding

  - by Jason M

  I am consuming an secured service hosted over basicHttpBinding I have to pass credentials to the service for authenticatioon Here’s the config setting for the client <security mode="TransportWithMessageCredential"> <transport clientCredentialType="None" proxyCredentialType="None" realm="" /> <message clientCredentialType="UserName" algorithmSuite="Default" /> </security> While calling the service, I am getting following exception message An unsecured or incorrectly secured fault was received from the other party. See the inner FaultException for the fault code and detail. Message = "An invalid security token was provided (Bad UsernameToken Values)” I not sure how to get it working I am curious if somebody can help me out or provide me any url where I could find the solution

  Read the article

• Python XML + Java XML interoperability.

  - by erb

  Hello. I need a recommendation for a pythonic library that can marshall python objects to XML(let it be a file). I need to be able read that XML later on with Java (JAXB) and unmarshall it. I know JAXB has some issues that makes it not play nice with .NET XML libraries so a recommendation on something that actually works would be great.

  Read the article

• Can a WCF contract use multiple callback interfaces?

  - by mafutrct

  I'm trying something like this: [ServiceContract ( CallbackContract = typeof (CallbackContract_1), CallbackContract = typeof (CallbackContract_2), CallbackContract = typeof (CallbackContract_3)) ] public interface SomeWcfContract { I know it does not work like this. Is there still a way to get a single contract use multiple callback interfaces?

  Read the article

< Previous Page | 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15  | Next Page >