I need to provide non repudiation in my WCF services and want to store all my incomming SOAP requests into a SQL server DB with signature/security data and all the envelope stuff.
This way, when a problem occurs, we can tell to the client "Hi, THIS is your signed message" exactly as you wrote it.
To do this, I need to store a relationship between the SOAP envelope XML's and my persisted bussiness objects/transactions.
Example: THIS is the SOAP Envelope used to add Customer ID=4567 to my Customers datables.
I need to establish a link between SOAP envelope and the bussiness transaction performed by my app. Storing ##identity of the logged message could be a solution. But, where do I put it? In the SOAP Body? Keep it in memmory?
I've reading about logging in WCF and wrote a Database Logger that inserts into tables the log info instead a text file, but i don't know how to link this data with the parsed/deserialized bussines datacontract object that arrives to my WCF service's method.
I don't even know if this is the rigth approach!
Any pattern/tip/hint/tool/help would be appreciated.
Thanks.
If you have enabled the message logging feature of WCF (http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms730064.aspx), you can write a custom listener, and there add all the logic you need. To write a custom listener you only have to implement the TraceListener interface (fairly simple) and then configure WCF to use it, adding it to the listeners section inside the system.diagnostics, replacing the default listener.
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.
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.
I want to add a complex poco that will pass itself within each wcf call. Whats the bast practice for this case?
Typically, the best way to do something like this is passing such "meta-information" in a WCF header. You can easily create a message inspector to extend WCF (it's really not that scary and hard to do!) which would inject the POCO class (or what of it is necessary) into every outgoing request from the client, and retrieve it from the header and validate it on the server side.
There are a number of pretty good blog post out there showing you how to create a message inspector:
Richard Hallgren's WCF postings
Writing a WCF message inspector
Automatic Culture Flowing with WCF by using Custom Behaviour
Check out the two relevant interfaces to implement:
IClientMessageInspector on the client side, which has a BeforeSendRequest and AfterReceiveReply message to implement
IDispatchMessageInspector on the server side, which has a AfterReceiveRequest and BeforeSendReply method to implement
Here you go, check this out...
https://kinnrot.github.io/passing-complex-type-through-wcf/
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 have a VB.NET web service that calls a third party web service. How can I view the SOAP message generated by .NET before it is sent to the third party web service and how can I see the SOAP response before it is serialized by .NET.
When creating a standalone EXE, I see the Reference.vb file that is automatically generated, but don't see a similar file when my project is a web service. I have found lots of C# code to do this, but none in VB.NET.
Edit - Fiddler and TCP loggers are great, but will not work for my purposes. I need to be able to access the raw SOAP messages from within the application so I can log them or modify them. I need to do more than just see the messages going back and forth.
You can use fiddler or a tcp sniffer to filter and identify all outgoing and incoming traffic on your host.
This is if you want to see the xml request and response.
How about using an extension to allow you to examine the SOAP message?
Accessing Raw SOAP Messages in ASP.NET Web Services
http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/magazine/cc188761.aspx
I was trying to do the same thing and this seems to work for me:
Dim message As String = OperationContext.Current.RequestContext.RequestMessage.ToString()
I didn't think it would be that easy since most of the time ToString() returns the name of the class, but I tried it out and low and behold.
I know you asked this back in January so if since then you've figured out a better way let me know.
Please note that if you're catching the exception in a class that implements IErrorHandler then you have to perform this operation from within the ProvideFault() method instead of the HandleError() method because the context is closed before it gets to call the HandleError() method.
Hope this helps.