What's the use of action/reply action for service operation in WCF. So far, what I've understood is; action is used by WSDL to identify the service operation to which the message from the client belongs and in return reply action is used by service operation to identify the caller to which reply message belong --> Please correct me if I am wrong with this!
Now, I want to understand; what's the real use (apart from handling anonymous messages by using aster ix [*]), I mean this could well be handled internally by WCF instead of exposing it to the developer.
Also, why is action and replyaction required at all? I mean, we already have a name property for the service operation to identify the method and when I call Proxy.SomeMethod() then somemethod is already mapped to the Name property and it should be enough to identify the destination method for the message and similarly the replyaction. Please clarify.
Can I please get a simple real world scenario/or link to that to understand Action/ReplyAction in real life.
Many Thanks.
Actions are part of the various SOAP and WS-* specifcations.
So the first point is that this is not something unique to WCF it is a standard part of the specification you need to support if you want to have interoperable web services. They are used for message routing and other message handling functions.
Second, WCF DOES manage these by default. You only need to specify them yourself if you wish to customise or manage them in some other way. E.g. WCF will automatically generate them into the WSDL for you. WCF will also use them by default when it is selecting which operation to invoke for an incoming message. Again, WCF provides extension points to customise this behavior if you require.
Related
We are trying to build a Nservicebus service that can communicated with form and wpf based clients using WCF. I have read that you can inherit from WcfService.
like:
public class ThirdPartyWebSvc : WcfService<ThirdPartyCmd, ThirdPartyCmdResponse>
And then you simple create a endpoint in the app.config and you done like described here. but the problem is that i have to create a endpoint for every command.
I would like to have a single endpoint that excepts any command and returns its response.
public class ThirdPartyWebSvc : WcfService<ICommand, IMessage>
Can someone point me in the right direction? Using Nservicebus for client communication can't be done for us and i don't want to build a proxy like server unless thats the only way to do it.
Thanks
So from what I can gather, you want to expose a WCF service operation which consumers can call to polymorphically pass one of a number of possible commands to, and then have the service route that command to the correct NServiceBus endpoint which then handles the command.
Firstly, in order to achieve this you should forget about using the NserviceBus.WcfService base class, because to use this you must closely follow the guidance in the article you linked in your post.
Instead, you could:
design your service operation contract to accept polymorphic requests by using the ServiceKnownType attribute on your operation definition, adding all possible command types,
host the service using a regular System.ServiceModel.ServiceHost(), and then configure an NserviceBus.IBus in the startup of your hosted WCF service, and
define your UnicastBusConfig config section in your service config file by adding all the command types along with the recipient queue addresses
However, you now have the following drawbacks:
Because of the requirement to be able to pass in implementations of ICommand into the service, you will need to recompile your operation contract each time you need to add a new command type.
You will need to manage a large quantity of routing information in the config file, and if any of the recipient endpoints change, you will need to change your service config.
If your service has availability problems then no more messages to any of your NSB endpoints.
You will need to write code to handle what to do if you do not receive a response message from the NSB endpoints in a timely manner, and this logic may depend on the type of command sent.
I hope you are beginning to see how centralizing this functionality is not a great idea.
All the above problems would go away if you could get your clients to send commands to the bus in the standard way, but without msmq how can you do that?
Well, for a start you could look at using one of the other supported transports.
If none of these work for you and you have to use WCF hosted services, then you must follow the guidance in the linked article. This guidance is there to steer you in the correct direction - multiple WCF services sounds like a pain, until you try to centralize them into a single service - then the pain gets bigger, not less.
I'm building a WCF SOAP application. The WSDL file has numerous operations of which many have the same argument type. The WSDL file defines all soapAction attributes as "''". When I try to start such a service WCF throw an exception saying that soapActions have to be unique.
After some googling I'm even more puzzled than before. I used SOAPUI to create a mock service with two operations which take the same input type and without the soapActions defined it always chooses the same operation. When the actions are defined it works fine.
My questions are:
Can you make a WCF SOAP service without unique soapActions (actually leaving the soapActions "''" as defined in the original WSDL)?
How can a service choose the right operation without the soapAction defined?
Edited:
I'm not in control of the WSDL. I'm using the WSCF.Blue tool to create a service stub from the WSDL file. I might be able to modify the WSDL, but I want to see if there is some possibility to leave it as it is.
It is not very clear from your question but I suggest you are building service based on some defined WSDL, aren't you? WCF by default uses SOAP action because it is required part of WS-I Basic Profile 1.1 offered by WCF services with BasicHttpBinding. WSDLs with empty SOAP actions are used when the action is defined by root body element.
WCF samples provides example of custom DispatchOperationSelector which is able to route messages to operations by their root body element. This is probably what you need to add to your service so that clients based on provided WSDL can call it.
We are using an authentication string (guid) for client identification in our wcf services
and for database lookups.
We dont want to add this to every messagecontract.
Is there a way to do this in wcf?
Regards,
Rune
The best and typical way is to add this to a header in your WCF message - and that would be perfect in a message contract.
Why do you not want to add it to the message contract??
WCF typically encourages a "per-call" methodology - you send all necessary info with your call, each and every call that is. It is discouraged to have any kind of "state" that lingers around between calls.
So again: why not just include your authentication string as a header in every message? That's the preferred way of doing things these days.
UPDATE:
Check out Nicholas Allen's blog post on Adding Headers to a Call. Besides adding them to the message contract, you could also check out the Message Inspector sample he links to, which creates a message inspector that automagically adds those header entries to each outgoing call. No code clutter, no mess, nothing - just works.
I've got some WCF services (hosted in IIS 6) which use the Enterprise Library (4.0) Validation Application Block. If a client submits a message which fails validation (i.e. gets thrown back in a ValidationFault exception), I'd quite like to be able to log the message XML somewhere (using code, no IIS logs). All the validation happens before the service implementation code kicks in.
I'm sure it's possible to set up some class to get run before the service implementation (presumably this is how the Validation Application Block works), but I can't remember how, or work out exactly what to search for.
Is it possible to create a class and associated configuration that will give me access to either the whole SOAP request message, or at least the message body?
Take a look at using the Policy Injection Application Block...
I'm currently developing an application in which I intercept (using PIAB) all requests incoming to the server and based on the type of request I apply different validation behavior using the VAB.
Here's an article about integrating PIAB with WCF:
http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/magazine/cc136759.aspx
You can create different inteception mechanisms such as attributes applied to exposed operations.
You could log the whole WCF Message:
http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms730064.aspx
Or you could combine it with Enterprise Library Logging Application Block.
I found a blog post which seems to do what I want - you create a class that implements IDispatchMessageInspector. In the AfterReceiveRequest method, you have access to the whole incoming message, so can log away. This occurs after authentication, so you also have access to the user name - handy for logging. You can create supporting classes that let you assign this behaviour to services via attributes and/or configuration.
IDispatchMessageInspector also gives you a BeforeSendReply method, so you could log (or alter) your response message.
Now when customers attempt to literally hand-craft SOAP request messages (not even using some kind of DOM object) to our services, we have easy-to-access proof that they are sending rubbish!
I have run into a problem when calling web service on a SAP PI bus from my WCF client.
The operation is defined as one-way, and the method on my proxy operation contract is decorated accordingly when the service reference is added.
However, the service client gets an exception when calling the according operation:
The one-way operation returned a non-null message with Action=''
Using SoapUI, the method on the bus can be called successfully, and it returns a SOAP envelope with an empty body. The bus people told me, this is according to the SOAP specs:
(SOAP specs, chapter 4.7.9, One-way operations):
There are differing interpretations of how HTTP is to be used when performing one-way operations.
R2714 For one-way operations, an INSTANCE MUST NOT return a HTTP response that contains an envelope. Specifically, the HTTP response entity-body must be empty.
R2750 A CONSUMER MUST ignore an envelope carried in a HTTP response message in a one-way operation.
R2727 For one-way operations, a CONSUMER MUST NOT interpret a successful HTTP response status code (i.e., 2xx) to mean the message is valid or that the receiver would process it.
So it seems, my WCF client doesn't comply with R2750.
I have found out that when I force the operation contract on the proxy to be IsOneWay = false, everything works.
Is there anything wrong with the way WCF handles one way operations or do I do something wrong (more likely)?
Is there anything else I should do, it just doesn't seem right to override the generated WCF proxy client.
Thanks for any suggestions.
It looks like SAP PI incorrectly sends an empty SOAP envelope and .NET incorrectly interprets that envelope.
Some options from this thread:
alter the generated proxy and remove OneWay=true (or add OneWay=false) to the method definition
catch the Protocol Violation in an exception handler and ignore it
use a 2.0 style webreference to call the service
apply SAP patch Note 1459995 - Soap Sender Adapter HTTP 202 and add &responsecode202=true to the url
The first and last options both worked for me. Further discussion on this sap.com thread.
I would take a look at this article as well by Gerben van Loon here. One way operation might not really be one way according to the standards.
Check this SAP thread out for the complete discussion:
http://scn.sap.com/thread/1627368
#Brian Low has answered this question correctly and very thoroughly (is should get marked as the answer).
I would also like to add that this is a known error in which the SOAP Adapter does not comply with the aforementioned WS-I Basic Profile 1.1 (R2750) and WCF does not comply with (R2750). The result... Hours of wasted time and teeth gnashing....
I believe that this particular problem can be fixed by adding the following attribute declaration to the operation in the client porxy:
[WebInvoke(BodyStyle = WebMessageBodyStyle.Wrapped)]
Without seeing what the signature of the method looks like, my best guess is that your method defined to return something other than "void". Since the operation is one-way, the method can only be defined using "void" (has no return). Anything else, and the operation is NOT one-way.