(Jeremy)
9/23/2004 9:34:00 PM
No, the server is creating this object and returning it to the client.
"Ken Kolda" <ken.kolda@elliemae-nospamplease.com> wrote in message
news:u24x0KaoEHA.692@TK2MSFTNGP12.phx.gbl...
> Is it the case that you're passing this object from the client to the
server
> and then invoking the methods on the server? If so, that means that you
have
> registered the channel incorrectly on the client. When you register it,
you
> should use
>
> Channel chan = new TcpChannel(0);
>
> The "0" tells .NET to setup a server channel in the client as well so it
can
> handle callbacks from the server.
>
> Ken
>
>
> "Jeremy Lew" <jslew@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:O0gQMSZoEHA.556@tk2msftngp13.phx.gbl...
> > Perhaps I mischaracterized the problem, since the CLR is supposed to do
> > exactly the CoMarshal/CoUnMarshalInterface thing in this situation. The
> > problem is, once I have passed the reference across the remoting
boundary,
> a
> > call to it results in the old "This remoting proxy has no
> > channel sink which means either the server has no registered server
> > channels..."
> >
> > "Jeremy Lew" <jslew@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> > news:u$WagEZoEHA.1176@TK2MSFTNGP12.phx.gbl...
> > > I want to pass a COM object reference between two managed processes (A
&
> > B)
> > > which are communicating via TCP/IP remoting. So, I instantiate a RCW
in
> > > process A, and return it to B during as the return value of a remote
> > method
> > > call. However, what seems to be happening is that B gets a proxy to
A's
> > > RCW. What I really want to happen is that B will get direct reference
> > (e.g.
> > > its own in-process RCW) to the COM object. Basically, I want what
would
> > > happen if you used CoMarshalInterface/CoUnmarshalInterface and passed
> the
> > > marshalled bytes. Do I have to resort to actually doing this through
> > > P/Invoke, or is there some more natural way in .NET?
> > >
> > > Thanks
> > > Jeremy
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
>
>