[lnkForumImage]
TotalShareware - Download Free Software
Confronta i prezzi di migliaia di prodotti.
Asp Forum
 Home | Login | Register | Search 


 

Forums >

microsoft.public.dotnet.framework.remoting

Why doesn't remoting work from Win2k to WinXP?

mdb

7/15/2004 7:07:00 PM

I was reading the articles in this newsgroup earlier trying to figure out
why my remoting project would work when the server and client were both
running on the same machine, but not when they were running on different
machines. I came across an article by another person that had the same
problem and had finally realized that Win2k-to-Win2k worked ok, and WinXP-
to-WinXP worked ok, but Win2k-to-WinXP would fail on the client with a
message:

"A connection attempt failed because the connected party did not properly
respond after a period of time, or established connection failed because
connected host has failed to respond."

I have confirmed that (at least in my case) the problem is only experienced
when the server is on WinXP and the client is on Win2k. (It works ok the
other way around.) I experience the same problem whether they are both in
the same domain or otherwise.

Any ideas of what I can change in order to get this to work between
W2k/WXP?

I'm running XP Service Pack 1 with all the latest critical updates.

-mdb
6 Answers

Allen Anderson

7/15/2004 9:05:00 PM

0

win2k to winxp works just fine. Whoever wrote that had something else
going on. What problem exactly are you having? I''m debugging a
client right now on win2k that is calling my server on xp and its
working like a champ.

Cheers,
Allen Anderson
http://www.glacialcomp...
mailto: allen@put my website base here.com


On Thu, 15 Jul 2004 12:07:03 -0700, mdb
<m_b_r_a_y@c_t_i_u_s_a_dot_com> wrote:

>I was reading the articles in this newsgroup earlier trying to figure out
>why my remoting project would work when the server and client were both
>running on the same machine, but not when they were running on different
>machines. I came across an article by another person that had the same
>problem and had finally realized that Win2k-to-Win2k worked ok, and WinXP-
>to-WinXP worked ok, but Win2k-to-WinXP would fail on the client with a
>message:
>
>"A connection attempt failed because the connected party did not properly
>respond after a period of time, or established connection failed because
>connected host has failed to respond."
>
>I have confirmed that (at least in my case) the problem is only experienced
>when the server is on WinXP and the client is on Win2k. (It works ok the
>other way around.) I experience the same problem whether they are both in
>the same domain or otherwise.
>
>Any ideas of what I can change in order to get this to work between
>W2k/WXP?
>
>I''m running XP Service Pack 1 with all the latest critical updates.
>
>-mdb

Sunny

7/15/2004 9:13:00 PM

0

Hi,

can you post short but complete example. Read this article to see what I
mean.

http://www.yoda.arachsys.com/csharp/com...

Sunny


In article <Xns9527991DB864Embrayctiusacom@207.46.248.16>,
m_b_r_a_y@c_t_i_u_s_a_dot_com says...
> I was reading the articles in this newsgroup earlier trying to figure out
> why my remoting project would work when the server and client were both
> running on the same machine, but not when they were running on different
> machines. I came across an article by another person that had the same
> problem and had finally realized that Win2k-to-Win2k worked ok, and WinXP-
> to-WinXP worked ok, but Win2k-to-WinXP would fail on the client with a
> message:
>
> "A connection attempt failed because the connected party did not properly
> respond after a period of time, or established connection failed because
> connected host has failed to respond."
>
> I have confirmed that (at least in my case) the problem is only experienced
> when the server is on WinXP and the client is on Win2k. (It works ok the
> other way around.) I experience the same problem whether they are both in
> the same domain or otherwise.
>
> Any ideas of what I can change in order to get this to work between
> W2k/WXP?
>
> I''m running XP Service Pack 1 with all the latest critical updates.
>
> -mdb
>

mdb

7/16/2004 8:18:00 PM

0

Sunny <sunny@newsgroups.nospam> wrote in news:OuogGCraEHA.2340
@TK2MSFTNGP09.phx.gbl:

> http://www.yoda.arachsys.com/csharp/com...

Here it is... Its a VS.NET solution with 3 classes - one common class
(the remoting object), the host, and the client. The remoting object
presents one public method "Alert(string)" which displays a messagebox
with the text of the string on the host when it is called by the client.
I've hardcoded the string in the client. The client program expects ONE
command line parameter specifying the host machine name (use
'localhost' or a name or an IP - it doesn't matter - it just gets stuck
into the activation URL.)

On my machine, going from W2k to XP just doesn't work - the text of the
error is in the previous message (thread.) Its definitely not a network
problem (ie the packets are getting from client to host). I verified
this by capturing packets w/ Ethereal. (Incidentally, looking thru the
packets provided one potential source of failure - details below.)

Please download the zip from:

http://users.ctinet.net/mbray/DemoBadRe...

or if you can't get it from there for some reason then let me know and I
can either email it or post it here.

BTW... details on the packet analysis are this... one of the packets
that my server is sending back to the client contain the string
"tcp://169.254.18.31:2111" which is an address that my Cisco VPN Network
adapter has assigned to a fake network card (its not a physical card.)
There is no way that the client would be able to contact this address,
but I can ping it from my server. I haven't been able to verify that
the client is trying to use this address, but why would it?? It has
already created the connection - why would it try to go somewhere else.
Anyway, if you guys test this program and it works then I'll load
etherreal on my client and see what it is doing as well.

-mdb

mdb

7/16/2004 8:28:00 PM

0

> Hi,
>
> can you post short but complete example. Read this article to see what
> I mean.
>
> http://www.yoda.arachsys.com/csharp/com...
>
> Sunny


OK guys - I've fixed the problem... I noticed an URL in one of Allen's
other messages talking about "Erratic System.NullReferenceException" and
read the article even though I didn't think it had anything to do with me.
After reading the article I realized it had everything to do with me, so I
tried it, and voila - everything is smooth.

-mdb

mdb

7/16/2004 8:37:00 PM

0

> OK guys - I've fixed the problem... I noticed an URL in one of
> Allen's other messages talking about "Erratic
> System.NullReferenceException" and read the article even though I
> didn't think it had anything to do with me. After reading the article
> I realized it had everything to do with me, so I tried it, and voila -
> everything is smooth.

Actually I do have one further question... first let me clarify - I'm
referring to the article
http://www.glacialcomponents.com/ArticleDetail.aspx?artic...

When I did this, I had to change the port that I was setting from the
original port to a different port (I chose port+1) - otherwise it
complained that the port was already in use (by my own object no doubt.)

Does this mean that my server is now actually listening on the secondary
(port+1) port instead of the one single port that I want?

-mdb

Allen Anderson

7/16/2004 10:32:00 PM

0

it means that possibly you are registering the object more than once.
Which indeed you would be listening on more than one port. If you
just run my stock example it doesn't have this problem. If you need
any more explanation from that article just ask!

Cheers,
Allen Anderson
http://www.glacialcomp...
mailto: allen@put my website base here.com

On Fri, 16 Jul 2004 13:37:26 -0700, mdb
<m_b_r_a_y@c_t_i_u_s_a_dot_com> wrote:

>> OK guys - I've fixed the problem... I noticed an URL in one of
>> Allen's other messages talking about "Erratic
>> System.NullReferenceException" and read the article even though I
>> didn't think it had anything to do with me. After reading the article
>> I realized it had everything to do with me, so I tried it, and voila -
>> everything is smooth.
>
>Actually I do have one further question... first let me clarify - I'm
>referring to the article
>http://www.glacialcomp.../ArticleDetail.aspx?articleID=CAOMN
>
>When I did this, I had to change the port that I was setting from the
>original port to a different port (I chose port+1) - otherwise it
>complained that the port was already in use (by my own object no doubt.)
>
>Does this mean that my server is now actually listening on the secondary
>(port+1) port instead of the one single port that I want?
>
>-mdb