Genuine Channels Product-Family of bidirectional .Net Remoting channels

Authorization

To be allowed to write messages, you need to login.

Login:
Password:

New user?

Discussion Group
>>home >>forum list >>thread list

Forum list | Thread list |

Keywords:

Thread:

Windows Communication Foundation (WCF)


Author:	jeff
Status:	customer
Date:	7/29/2006 7:56:00 AM

Do you guys have any comments about WCF? How will genuine channels work with WCF?

Do you plan on using it's technology at all or just being compatible with it?

Thanks!


Author:	SamSam
Status:	guest
Date:	11/28/2006 6:48:52 AM

.Net 3.0 is released for some time already, does GC have some plan for WCF?


Author:	Sergey Tkachev
Status:	developer
Date:	9/11/2007 1:22:36 PM

We have several projects on WCF and this technology is really a step forward, but I think it is evolution of Web Services but not .Net Remoting. There are tons of articles describing the difference between these two approaches. My opinion is that .Net Remoting and Genuine Channels are still useful if all your remote pears are written in .Net; if you need to write closely coupled distributed application; if performance is vital. Microsoft also thinks the same way, that is why all new versions of .Net Framework contain Remoting.

We have studied opportunity to integrate WCF and Genuine Channels, but come to the conclusion that this would not be interesting for end-users. Thus WCF and Genuine Channels will live simultaneously. I agree that there is a number of tasks that can be solved with the help of both technologies and the choice is not clear. But in most cases they are not competitors.

I will schedule an article, where try to compare WCF and Genuine Channels. As for now I would advise to Google and find any article comparing WCF and Remoting. All you find in such articles about Remoting can be safely prorogated to Genuine Channels.


Author:	Luke
Status:	customer
Date:	11/27/2007 4:29:51 AM

I have been evaluating WCF vs Genuine Channels. At this time I am disappointed in WCF by what appear to be restrictions on user authentication and requiring Digital Certificates on at least the hosting server. For this I think GC has been a better decision.


Author:	dvdaniels
Status:	customer
Date:	12/12/2007 8:24:34 PM

I am not seeing those problems with the release version of wcf Luke. Authentication seems pretty flexible and it only requires a certificate if you ask it to. I too liked GC but it is looking more and more like it is riding off in to the sunset.