I could not find a direct answer to this. Basically I have services MainService and SubService. The idea is that the Client software calls some methods in the MainService, but SubService calls another part of the service in MainService.
I am deploying to Azure and I want to have two separate interfaces in MainService, one for client and one for SubService and I don't want Client service to have any chance of access to the interface the SubService uses.
Given that I am new to WCF services, I am not sure how to approach this. Do I need multiple web roles for different interfaces that access the same database and handle concurrency issues etc. there, or can I somehow include multiple interfaces but restrict the availability by, for example, certificates. I am not exactly sure on Azure firewall rules, but if the interface in MainService that is meant for the SubService could be mapped to a separate port that would be behind a firewall rule, that would also be a viable solution.
tl;dr: Need two separate interfaces in a WCF service, one for client software (open for outer world), one for a sub-system service. Both services are to be run in Azure. What are my options?
You can use standard WCF authorization and authentication. For example: http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ff647503.aspx
If you wanted to use Azure Service Bus with relay messaging, you could use some of the authentication and authorization provided by Service Bus. But, I'm not sure if there's any extra value there compared to just hosting your WCF in a web role (you'd have to do that in either case, but the access to the service would be decoupled from the clients via Service Bus).
Related
I have a web app that talks to a service layer via WCF. These need to be internal endpoints and should be .net TCP bindings. However I also have some services in the service layer that don't need to be consumed internally but need to be exposed to the outside world i.e. http/https input endpoints. What is the best way in implementing this in Azure?
I was hoping someone could provide clarification / advice on the following points:
If I use internal endpoints are these load balanced? There seems to be a lot of contradicting info around the web. I have read that you need to implement your own algorithm, but I have also read that this has now been implemented by Microsoft and it is automatic.
Should the service layer be a web role or a worker role? It seems that there is a bit of a workaround to get internal TCP bindings working with a web role?
Is there a specific set of guidelines as to which one to use? i.e. web role or worker role.
I am assuming I am going to need two instances regardless of whether or not I use a web role or worker role? but wouldn't this depend on the first point? i.e. if there is no load balancer is there even any point in having 2 worker role instances?
Would it be better to split my service layer into two layers? One to expose the internal endpoints and another to expose the public endpoints?
Thanks in advance.
My previous answer got truncated. Take a look at Azure Service bus, you can create relays there to expose your internal WCF services
You can use a service relay for this, take a look # Azure
My understanding on routing service in WCF is this -
The actual services resides in your private network which is not accessible to the world. You then have a routing service as an intermediary which internally (based on inspecting the request) calls the services in protected environment. This routing service is accessible to client and client uses this routing service to communicate with actual services.
Hence, how will the client know about the service contract exposed by the back-end service (as explained in most of the articles on routing)? If from WSDL, then client will anyway know about base address of back-end service and directly call the service instead of routing service. How can we enforce this constraint on client side?
Thought?
Thanks!
Normally, in said cases, you will expose the service contract through other means, such as a statically published WSDL. This is going to be more prevalent in scenarios in which you are using mechanisms such as protocol transitions, as the original, dynamically-generated metadata is going to be wrong anyhow.
For simpler scenarios (in which all you want to do is avoiding exposing your server directly to the network), a reverse proxy might be a preferable alternative in some cases if you're using HTTP.
Currently we run a UI web role and a web service web role(WCF REST) on Azure. Each role contains 2 instances (for load balancing and meeting the SLA reqs.)
The UI Web role and web service web role are within the same subscription but in different deployments. We do not want to merge the code bases (maintainability etc etc). So the UI layer is on xyz.cloudapp.net and the Web Service layer is on abc.cloudapp.net.
Currently, the requirement is to make the web service web role an internal endpoint i.e only accessible by the UI layer. The literature on configuring internal endpoints and accessing it from a different deployment is not very clear.
I am assuming that the two different roles need to be part of a single deployment for this to work. Can this be done without affecting the deployments? Any pointers in the right direction would be greatly appreciated.
Internal endpoints are only accessible within a single deployment, and do not route through the load balancer (so if you have 2 instances of your wcf services accessible on internal endpoint, you'd need to distribute calls between the instances). This, of course, would require you to put both your web role and wcf web role into the same deployment.
You might want to consider service bus for a secure way of reaching your wcf services from your web role instances. Or... expose the wcf services via input endpoint but secure the service.
There's an approach I like to call the virtual DMZ that sould meet your needs: http://brentdacodemonkey.wordpress.com/?s=virtual+dmz
It leverages the ACS and WCF bindings to allow you to create access control to input endpoints (which are then load balanced). Of course, if you don't want something tha robust, you can go with just a standard old WCF mutual auth scenario.
That said, David makes an excellent point. Internal endpoints are only accessible with a single deployed service. This is because that service represents an isolation boundary (think virtual lan branch) and the only input endpoints can be adressed from outside of that boundary.
Have you considered using ACS (Access Control Services) for restricting access using claims-based authentication to your WCF endpoint?
There are numerous protection schemes you could provide via WCF bindings.
Internal Endpoints can only communicate with inter-roles in the same deployment. If you have 2 separate deployments (abc.cloudapp.net and xyz.cloudapp.net, internal endpoints won't help you).
Planning to migrate our existing application to Azure.
Our existing architecture with security flow is as follows
ASP MVC 3.0 UI layer that takes user name password from the user
We are planning to migrate the UI layer onto a compute cloud.
and will be accessible at say uilayerdomainname.com which would have a SSL cert.
WCF REST webservices layer that amongst other things does authentication as well. This is currently on say servicename.cloudapp.net. (We could map it to servicelayername.com and get a SSL for that domain name as well).
SQL Azure database
The UI layer sends the credentials to the service layer which authenticates it against the SQL azure database.
Question
Both the WCF compute cloud and UI Layer are on the same region in Azure. Would the communication between these two be prone to man in the middle attacks? Does my WCF compute cloud need SSL as well? We do have two domain names with SSLs and so could just map the services to one.
Is there any way I can restrict traffic between the UI layer and the WCF compute cloud - allow only the UI layer to access the services layer?
Would the performance be better if I publish both the WCF services and UI layer on the same instance? It sort of shoots down the nice layered architecture but if it improves performance I could go with it. We don't want to jump through too many hoops to accomodate the app to Azure lest it becomes difficult to migrate out of it.
If you host your services in a Worker Role, then they can be available only to your Web Role. You can also host it elsewhere and monitor requests in code. Azure Roles in the same deployment can communicate with one another in a very specific way that is not available outside of the deployment.
In Azure deployments, you need to very specifically define your public endpoint because the roles are hosted behind a load-balancer. If you host your WCF service from within a worker-role it will not be accessible publicly.
Hope this helped
If you configure the WCF service and UI layer to only communicate through internal endpoints then the communication is private. There is no need to purchase or configure an SSL certificate for the WCF service unless it is made public.
Further, the only traffic between these internal endpoints will be between your instances -- so, the traffic is already restricted between your UI layer and the WCF service.
This is the case for both Web roles and worker roles: you can configure a Web role hosting your WCF service to have a private internal endpoint.
Depending on the architecture of your system you may see better performance if you have the UI and WCF layer on the same machine.
If your interface is "chatty" and calls the WCF service several times for each UI request then you'll definitely see a performance improvement. If there's just one or two calls then the improvement is likely to be minimal compared to the latency of your database.
I'm trying to build a WCF self hosted service (eventually in a windows service) that will receive binary and text base messages from remote thick clients that have no accounts on my hosted machine. I'm trying to figure out both my binding options and security options, and in reading the patterns and practices guides, my head has completely spun around at least once.
The clients would be authenticated against a custom SQL based method, so I'd like to be able to pass that info in the initial login request and then set an authorization token of some kind. (This part of the problem is probably outside the scope of the question, but I included it in case it might make a difference.)
Any thoughts at all would be very helpfull.
Ryan
The choice of binding and security option depends on the usage of your WCF service. Is it just for your rich client or are you planning to expose it to the world as API? If it's just for your rich app, does it run on LAN or over untrusted, unreliable Internet?
With WCF you can configure the service to expose multiple endpoints with different bindings, for example both SOAP and REST. In general, I'd start with something stateless and lightweight like basicHttpBinding and webHttpBinding, passing user and password on every request. Once you have that up and running you can optimize cache authentication, provide binary endpoint etc.. only if it actually helps.
There's no need to have just one binding. Having said that if it's self hosted you're "on your own" here. I've never looked at what's involved.