Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Koen Zomers" data-source="post: 678340" data-attributes="member: 108135">Did I say superb yet, Mike? <img src="" class="smilie smilie--sprite smilie--sprite2" alt=";)" title="Wink&nbsp; &nbsp; ;)" loading="lazy" data-shortname=";)" /> Sounds great. That's exactly what we need! No hassle with IIS or Cassini, just a simple webservice based on a Windows Service application. I know WCF has the tendency to force you to use SSL, but I wonder if this doesn't create an extra complexity during installation of end users? Wouldn't it be an idea to also offer it as HTTP since it will only be used over local networks? What's your vision on this?[USER=56421]DieBagger[/USER], I think Mike is right on the road we talked about and there's no need for us to do the same. Let's take Mike his work as a base for many more nice extensions to come <img src="" class="smilie smilie--sprite smilie--sprite1" alt=":)" title="Smile&nbsp; &nbsp; :)" loading="lazy" data-shortname=":)" /></blockquote>

[QUOTE="Koen Zomers, post: 678340, member: 108135"] Did I say superb yet, Mike? ;) Sounds great. That's exactly what we need! No hassle with IIS or Cassini, just a simple webservice based on a Windows Service application. I know WCF has the tendency to force you to use SSL, but I wonder if this doesn't create an extra complexity during installation of end users? Wouldn't it be an idea to also offer it as HTTP since it will only be used over local networks? What's your vision on this? [USER=56421]DieBagger[/USER], I think Mike is right on the road we talked about and there's no need for us to do the same. Let's take Mike his work as a base for many more nice extensions to come :) [/QUOTE]

Verification