The Old .NET Questions Forum

.NET Remoting

I am really interested in and reading up on this topic and I am a bit perplexed by the lack of comment and info on this topic in this forum and elsewhere. Does anyone use it and/or have any feedback or ugly rumours about it?

Greg Tomkins
Friday, September 10, 2004

I use it.

When I had a problem I posted in the microsoft.public.dotnet.framework.remoting newsgroup, and received good/quick answers which (for my specific question) directed me to an article at http://www.glacialcomponents.com/ArticleDetail.aspx?articleID=CAOGuide and to some online source code available via http://www.ingorammer.com/Book/AdvancedDotNetRemoting.html

Christopher Wells
Friday, September 10, 2004

I am unclear whether .NET Remoting is inherently only possible between Windows .NET machines. I was sure this was true but then this book I am reading right now says the opposite. How would you remote to a Unix box? (I think in that scenario you'd probably be more likely to use Web Services).

Greg Tomkins
Friday, September 10, 2004

I don't know. A picked-at-random Googled web page says:

"The binary messaging protocol available in the .NET Remoting framework is Microsoft's official replacement for COM/DCOM. It is the most efficient way to make .NET applications communicate with each other, but, differently from SOAP, it is not meant for cross-platform communication because it only works between .NET applications."

Apart from Web services and SOAP, another cross-platform technology might be XML-RPC ( http://www.xmlrpc.com ), not to mention CORBA, Sockets, etc.

Perhaps your book is refering to .NET-on-Unix (i.e. the "Mono" project).

For a 2nd or 3rd opinion, perhaps ask in the microsoft newgroup mentioned above.

Christopher Wells
Friday, September 10, 2004

"The binary messaging protocol available in the .NET Remoting framework is Microsoft's official replacement for COM/DCOM."

Given that it has neither security nor encryption, it's virtually useless for most scenarios, which is why this "official replacement for COM/DCOM" is being tossed in the dumpster once Indigo hits the scenes.

.NET Remoting is the least elegant, most hackish aspect of an otherwise elegant .NET.

Dennis Forbes
Saturday, September 11, 2004

My understanding is that the binary *format* (i.e. binary formatter) will be replaced by another ... and that the .NET Remoting *API* will remain. Even now you can add features like encyption to your remoting, by using a custom 'channel sink'.

Christopher Wells
Saturday, September 11, 2004

Indigo is pretty much a wholesale replacement of .NET Remoting. Saying that you can "add" custom encryption channel sinks is like saying that a car is a plane if you drive it into a C5 Galaxy -- in essence you might as well skip the car altogether.

Dennis Forbes
Saturday, September 11, 2004

Good grief... .NET Remoting is *already* passe? MS's Indigo FAQ is pretty clear that you are right. Should we start developing for Indigo or just wait for it too to go to the MS API graveyard?

Greg Tomkins
Sunday, September 12, 2004

A useful site, if you haven't seen it before: http://www.thinktecture.com/Resources/RemotingFAQ/default.html

John Rusk
Tuesday, September 14, 2004

For .NET Remoting scenarios requiring encryption and/or security, I've had a very good experience using it on top of IPSec.

- Clay

Clay Ver Valen
Wednesday, September 15, 2004

Re Indigo replacing Remoting. As I understand it the situation is this:

(a) Remoting is still recommended for those situations where it is appropriate. See http://www.lhotka.net/WeBlog/PermaLink.aspx?guid=4e33539f-14c3-4446-9077-8f6578b31221

(b) As long as you avoid custom sinks and formatters, your Remoting code will port to Indigo easily. See http://www.lhotka.net/WeBlog/PermaLink.aspx?guid=aa092a06-253b-4a3a-9c5e-58011f941479

John Rusk
Tuesday, September 21, 2004