This has to be a pretty simple task. I have an Azure Cloud Service that works just fine with HTTP and HTTPS. Now I want to create a net.tcp connection to the cloud service. The first thing I discover is that net.tcp is not supported by IIS Express. That's fine. So I try switching to regular IIS and all I get when I try to run the application is a 404 error. If I was building an WCF Web Application, I would get a form that allows me to select (and build) the virtual directory for the application, but there's no analog for this in the Cloud Service.
I can take a fresh 'Cloud Service' project build using visual studio, make no changes to it except change IIS Express to IIS. When I launch it, I get a 404 error in the web browser.
Does anyone have a working example of tcp.net (with IIS Express or standard IIS) in a Cloud Service?
This video by the Azure team is a great overview and cleared up a lot of conceptual issues I had. An Azure Cloud Service is a container around one or more virtual machines. The virtual machines basically come in two flavors: Web Role and Worker Role. What threw me is the description that the Worker Role was intended for background processes: not true. A Web Role is basically a VM with IIS, a Worker Role is basically a VM without IIS. Since the off-the-shelf IIS doesn't have net.tcp installed, you have to jump through hoops in order to get the protocol installed. Instead, the Worker Role can be used as a self-hosted web service. If you want the performance and throughput of TCP, this appears to be the direction to go.
Related
When I run my WCF in normal mode it works, but when I run through the Azure Computer Emulator on my local PC, the port numbers are different. For instance, the WCF page opens up in under the address: http://localhost:81/ServiceName1.svc, but the WSDL address says
You can also access the service description as a single file:
http://pc-name1:82/ServiceName1.svc?singleWsdl
When I try to connect using WCF test client, it is not working when I try to fetch the address http://localhost:81/ServiceName1.svc or the address http://pc-name1:82/ServiceName1.svc
Do you know what might be happening? Has anyone noticed this when using the Azure emulator?
Have you gone through the Hosting WCF within Windows Azure exercise? This behaviour is explained. You need an update to the WCF - KB981002- WCF: Hotfix rollup update, which will add a special behavior for your WCF services:
7.About the System.ServiceModel configuration above:
For this example we are exposing a metadata exchange (MEX) endpoint in addition to the service main endpoint. This will expose
the service metadata and thus allow service references to be added to
this service in Visual Studio.
The useRequestHeadersForMetadataAddress behavior is a special behavior that is defined in KB981002- WCF: Hotfix rollup update. It
allows WCF to serve correct metadata behind load balancers. Windows
Azure web roles are load balanced between one or more physical
servers.
I have worker roles that send out multicast messages using the azure service bus. Two of the consumers of these messages are websites hosted on Azure. I know that there are issues hosting service bus WCF endpoints in IIS even when running on premise. I've followed the Microsoft's advice and configured a service host programmatically.
One of the websites has been using this technique successfully for quite a while. It uses the hosted web core (it was developed before full IIS was an option on Azure) and it initialises the service host as part of the RoleEntryPoint.OnRun(). I'm trying to move this site to using full IIS. Because in full IIS the RoleEntryPoint runs in a different process to the site itself and the service host needs access to some static variables in the site I've moved the initialisation of the service host to the Global.asax Application_OnStart. This code works fine when running as a website under IIS locally and it runs fine when running in the compute emulator, but once I deploy it to the cloud my WCF host never seems to receive any messages. I haven't been able to catch any errors that are occurring.
Has anyone else out there successfully deployed something like this?
My head hurts so much I think I need a bottle of aspirin...
I've created a WCF service and, with help of others from this site and the department I work in, the WCF service is running as a service on my development machine. Tested it with a console app and it works.
But, it's not supposed to be on my development machine. It needs to be on a different server.
This is difficult because the server it is supposed to reside on DOES NOT have Visual Studio installed on it.
So I cannot run the VS 2008 Command Prompt with installutil to run the WCF service as a service on that server.
Broadly speaking, you've got three options, all of which are described on MSDN:
Host the service under IIS
Self-host the service in any managed .NET application
Host the WCF service under a Windows Service
Which one is right for you depends on what your service is for, how it'll be consumed, how scalable and secure you need the set-up to be, and a dozen other things besides. Without knowing a bit more about what your service does and how it'll be used in your organisation, it's difficult to make a recommendation.
IIS hosting is easy to set up and is the way to go if you want to leverage all of the industrial-strength hosting functionality that a full-blown web server offers.
Self-hosting is quick and easy - you can knock out a WCF-hosting console app in two minutes flat - but is the clunky solution. You of course have to run the host application as a particular Windows user. Perhaps not ideal?
Hosting under a Windows service is the middle ground. It gives you that always-available functionality without having to be logged in as a specific user, but doesn't offer the configurability and scalability of the IIS solution. It takes a bit more effort than belting out a quick console app, but not much.
The server that the windows service will reside on will have the .NET Framework. INSTALLUTIL is located in the Microsoft.NET\Framework(version number) folder in the Windows directory.
For example, C:\Windows\Microsoft.NET\Framework\v2.0.50727.
No need to write a console app to host your service now (unless you want to).
You can also host your WCF service under IIS, check this out: MSDN - How to: Host a WCF Service in IIS. It really is just a five minute job :)
Summary:
Does anybody know if there are known issues or configuration gotchas with an IIS service connecting to an Azure based service?
Scenario:
I currently have a scenario that requires me to host two web-services, one in Azure, and one on a server running IIS. The IIS hosted service (a WCF service) connects to the Azure hosted service (actually the Azure storage API) in order to fetch certain information. This information is manipulated and returned to the client.
Client -> IIS Service -> Azure Storage Service
Issue:
I'm running into issues with the IIS service connecting to the Azure Service. The hostname cannot be resolved. I'm using the Azure Storage client from my code, but have actually tried this using the azure API calls, and they also do not work from IIS. I captured the requests using Fiddler (on a different machine), they match the azure REST API calls, as expected. These requests, when made outside of IIS on the host machine execute properly. It is only when they are issued by the IIS service that they fail.
In my research other people have been running into this issue when there's a firewall problem, but since I can hit the service properly from the machine, that doesn't seem to fit the bill. My hunch is that there's a configuration issue I need to sort out in IIS, but I've failed to find anything useful with my searches.
Does anyone have any information on why this might be occuring (known bugs, gotchas etc)? Any workarounds? From a SOA perspective, this seems fairly critical to understand.
Any assitance anyone has would be helpful. Thank you.
Sounds like a proxy configuration issue. Check how your IIS server connected to Internet. If you are using some sort of proxy to get to Internet, that connection has to be configured correctly.
Specifically, if your proxy servers are Microsoft ISA server, or Microsoft Forefront TMG, then you need to check two things:
ISA server client or Forefront TMG client software is installed on the server
The account used by IIS application pool is domain user. ISA Server/TMG are designed to work only with user account, not service account. Alternative workaround for this limitation is using "defaultProxy" configuration in web.config, however it only wokrs for HTTP/HTTPS.
If you use different proxy server, then other issues might be involved, for example proxy might require authentication.
I need to remotely spawn WCF services on a remote machine from a client. I cannot use IIS (no HTTP) or WAS (no Windows Server 2008).
Was wondering if there's a way to do it apart from these hosting environments without having to create a service on the remote machine responsible for the spawning of other WCF services.
If a Windows Service host is the only way, can someone point me to a good article or book for an efficient architecture for doing this (including lifecycle management of spawned WCF services).
Thanks
Riko
If you cannot use IIS/WAS, then you're only option left is self-hosting.
You can host your WCF service in either a Windows (NT) Service, or a console app, or any other app you like to have.
The point though is: other than IIS/WAS which will load your service class as needed, when a request comes in and needs to be processed, in a self-hosting environment, you have to have your host app up and running - that's why a NT Service seems like the best choice at least for production environments, a service that can be run even if no one is logged on to the machine. Console or other apps require a user being logged on, and the app must be running.
Hope this helps a bit.
Marc
There is one additional option you can use on Server 2003 - hosting WCF services in COM+:
http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/bb735856.aspx
This is not as easy as hosting non-HTTP services in WAS on Server 2008, but provides a better supported monitoring and deployment model than hosting as an NT Service. Generally in my experience, though, most people I know have used NT services since is fairly straightforward to generate one in .NET, and then they perf counters or something similar to monitor them in production.