://msdn.microsoft.com/library/default.asp?url=/library/en-us/dnwi
nforms/html/reaworapps1.asp
-Original Message-
From: Shawn A. Van Ness [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Monday, January 20, 2003 2:12 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [ADVANCED-DOTNET] Remoting: What is everybody doing
-DOTNET] Remoting: What is everybody doing for
simple, robust, secure, efficient IPC?
I feel perhaps I'm not making my #1 complaint clear: if I open up a
*well-known* TCP port, even if it's just on the loopback adapter or
whatever, my app will break under Terminal Services (eg: Remote Desktop
]
Subject: Re: [ADVANCED-DOTNET] Remoting: What is everybody doing for
simple, robust, secure, efficient IPC?
I feel perhaps I'm not making my #1 complaint clear: if I open up a
*well-known* TCP port, even if it's just on the loopback adapter or
whatever, my app will break under Terminal Services (eg
I brought this up on the MS .NET remoting newsgroup last summer. I can't
believe MS wants us to use TCP for IPC ON THE SAME MACHINE. So inelegant.
You can read messages from the Advanced DOTNET archive, unsubscribe from Advanced
DOTNET, or
subscribe to other DevelopMentor lists at
-DOTNET] Remoting: What is everybody doing for
simple, robust, secure, efficient IPC?
Maybe... but I'd prefer a true local-only solution, so that I don't have
to endure the security liability of listening on a network endpoint.
I can't believe .NET is leading so many folks to use TCP for what
A Serviced Component living inside a COM+ Server Application could be used
as an IPC broker. It'd be always-on, resident in RAM. If anything needed
to be persisted, it could be stored in a local XML file or an ISAM table.
Or what about a message queue for IPC? Not as flexible as a SC but you
I feel perhaps I'm not making my #1 complaint clear: if I open up a *well-known* TCP
port, even if it's just on the loopback adapter or whatever, my app will break under
Terminal Services (eg: Remote Desktop, and Fast User Switching).
I'd like for my app to not crash or choke, just because my
Maybe... but I'd prefer a true local-only solution, so that I don't have to endure the
security liability of listening on a network endpoint.
I can't believe .NET is leading so many folks to use TCP for what would be
interprocess comm purposes... scares the heck out of me, quite frankly.
-S
: Saturday, 18 January 2003 11:03 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [ADVANCED-DOTNET] Remoting: What is everybody doing for
simple, robust, secure, efficient IPC?
Maybe... but I'd prefer a true local-only solution, so that I
don't have to endure the security liability of listening
PS : On Unix people often use sockets as is easy...same for java , the
recomendation is generally to use sockets for communicating to a process on
the same machine to avoid the hassle and overhead of Corba / RMI . It is the
same in .NET ,setting up remoting using sockets is trivial .
When you
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [ADVANCED-DOTNET] Remoting: What is everybody doing for
simple, robust, secure, efficient IPC?
PS : On Unix people often use sockets as is easy...same for java , the
recomendation is generally to use sockets for communicating to
a process on
the same
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Sunday, January 19, 2003 4:20 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [ADVANCED-DOTNET] Remoting: What is everybody
doing for simple, robust, secure, efficient IPC?
I agree with you , I would use IP sockets / remoting as it is
probably faster than COM. I
2003 02:25
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: [ADVANCED-DOTNET] Remoting: What is everybody doing for simple,
robust, secure, efficient IPC?
I have two winforms apps that would like to talk to each other. In
fact, two instances of the same winform app.
I struggle to find a good approach
Doesn't Named-Pipe transport w/in machine get implemented by Win32 as
memory-mapped file (i.e. shared memory)?
You can read messages from the Advanced DOTNET archive, unsubscribe from Advanced
DOTNET, or
subscribe to other DevelopMentor lists at http://discuss.develop.com.
]] On Behalf Of Shawn A. Van
Ness
Sent: 16 January 2003 02:25
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: [ADVANCED-DOTNET] Remoting: What is everybody doing for simple,
robust, secure, efficient IPC?
I have two winforms apps that would like to talk to each other. In
fact, two instances of the same winform app.
I
15 matches
Mail list logo
