Web Server ?

Hi,all you pros out there!I'm new in WebSite Programming so (I say it from the start) if I make any stupid mistakes don't mark on me! K,now that this is sayed,follows my question and requestment:
-I wanted to install a Web Server and when i write in my browser (IE6.0) http://localhost appears "The page cannot be displayed" ... can pls somebody with experience help me giving me a professional and detailed advice?I'd be very thankful. Thx!

I already tried out all what could be the cause for the problem
1.I looked in my browser (IE6-0) at LAN Settings for proxy server (not checked).
2.when i go into internet Information Services appears only Default FTP-Site
3.in Services is IIS is in Windows Components Wizard cheked(Windows 2000 Professional)

... just as help so that you can help me ...What directory on your local drive does the default web site point to (usually c:\inetpub\wwwroot)? Do any of the default documents configured for the site exist in that path?
I've got an inetpub directory,but it has only ftproot as subfolder (c:\inetpub\ftproot) and there aren't files in both directories.
What should i do?What's my problem? Thx
But you see a "Default Web Site" as a node in the IIS Admin console? If so, right-click that and choose "Properties". There should be a tab called "Home Directory" and a text box in there labelled "Local Path".

What does it have in there?
There is no Default Web Site,there is no NODE in the IIS Admin console! What should i do?
There's no "node" in the IIS Admin console. Hmm. Could you take a screen shot and post it somewhere where we can see it?

Web server

Hi All,
Not really even sure where to start.
What kind of software would I have to install on a machine to turn it
into an ASP .NET 2.0 web server?
Thanks,
Peterre:
> What kind of software would I have to install on a machine to turn it
> into an ASP .NET 2.0 web server?
IIS and the .Net Framework 2.0.
That's all.
Juan T. Llibre, asp.net MVP
aspnetfaq.com : http://www.aspnetfaq.com/
asp.net faq : http://asp.net.do/faq/
foros de asp.net, en espaol : http://asp.net.do/foros/
===================================
"BobLaughland" <peter.mcclymont@.gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1141000488.658307.91810@.i39g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
> Hi All,
> Not really even sure where to start.
> What kind of software would I have to install on a machine to turn it
> into an ASP .NET 2.0 web server?
> Thanks,
> Peter
>

Web Server

How to make an Web Server to host a ASP .Net page and to work like this :
- the servers work many computer
- the page connect to server from one computer
- one computer with server die and other computer take the place with
all connected pageYou will need either a load balanced or web farm for the roll over.
Curt Christianson
Site & Scripts: http://www.Darkfalz.com
Blog: http://blog.Darkfalz.com
"Claudiu Tescu" <ctescu@.msn.com> wrote in message
news:%230ON0fb%23EHA.1392@.tk2msftngp13.phx.gbl...
> How to make an Web Server to host a ASP .Net page and to work like this :
> - the servers work many computer
> - the page connect to server from one computer
> - one computer with server die and other computer take the place with
> all connected page
>
"Claudiu Tescu" <ctescu@.msn.com> wrote in message
news:#0ON0fb#EHA.1392@.tk2msftngp13.phx.gbl...
> How to make an Web Server to host a ASP .Net page and to work like this :
> - the servers work many computer
> - the page connect to server from one computer
> - one computer with server die and other computer take the place with
> all connected page
Check out Network Load Balancing (NLB) which is part of Microsoft's
clustering technologies:
[url]http://www.microsoft.com/windowsserver2003/technologies/clustering/default.mspx[/u
rl]

Web Server

This could be a very dumb question. I've always used ASP.NET with IIS being the web server on Win2K Server or XP Pro. Is it possible to run ASP.NET on Apache on Unix/Linux server?Nope.

And it's not dumb. That's a common request.

Don
I thought so. So when I hear that around 80% of the web servers are run on Linux/Unix, what development tools are they using? Is there a comparision chart using Apache on Linux/Unix v/s Win2K using IIS. I have just started working on .NET and the the IDE is absolutely mindblowing. Is there any other development tool that even comes close to .NET?
It is depend man, if you want to develop in Linux platform then go with PHP i recommend, however if you work with ASP.net then I basically recommend use Vs.net and IIS. But as my opinion they are almost the same, the only difference is that with ASP.net you have so many tools, controls, and support from all over the internet like everybody in this forum. And I don't find any PHP support as good as this web site man

Go try use Web Matrix if you don't want to get VS.net 2003

You can also use Macromedia Dreamweaver MX 2004

Cheers,
I have no intentions going to Linux/PHP combination. I am perfectly happy with .NET environment. And you are right, whenever I have had any question, I've just posted it on a forum here or VBCity and I've got a response within 12 to 24 hours. Would you reconnebd any other forums that are this responsive?

A lot of people are looking for free solutions. So MySQL, Linux, PHP probably is appealing to them. Though VS.NET, WIN2K, SQL Server is not free, it surely is inexpensive. The only reason I was asking is that is there anything at all in the development cycle, that could be done with PHP but not in ASP.NET?
So you mean a little bit about integrating both PHP and ASP.net. If that's the case, then I think you can integrate both by using XML, however you must be sure that you can process the XML generated by either PHP or ASP.net. I am not sure about the ability of PHP for processing XML data. But one thing that I can be sure is that it can be done in ASP.net perfectly. With PHP ver 5 I am sure that it has the ability because PHP ver 5 supports Web Service

Cheers,
I don't think I am going to go to PHP way. If I can accomplish everything in ASP.NET, I'll stick to that. My concern will be security and availability ( web server uptime ). Does the Win2K server go down more often than a Unix server? What about virus attacks?

Bottom line: If I can build an industrial strength application with ASP.NET that runs SMOOTHLY on Win2K, I do not want to go to Unix.
I have been dealing with the same problem. Deep down in my heart of hearts, I KNOW there is a way to run ASP with Apache - there just has to be. I've tried moving my DLL files, telling Apache to load different modules. Thus far, I have not come up with the right configuration for Apache to run ASP correctly.
As for a substitute scripting language on Linnux, I recommend Larry Well's programming language. PERL.
Well, obviously I would encourage you to get the facts and compare how many critical security problems there have been on Windows 2003+IIS6 and Linux/Apache v.last.
it is.

http://www.go-mono.org

Web Server

I have installed the VS 2003.net , IIS 5.1 and wanted to use it creating a ASP project.But every times when I click ASP.net web application, there will have a warning"The specified web server is not running ASP.net version 1.1, you will unable to run asp.net web applications and services."Did you try just re-installing .NET 1.1 after the VS.NET installation?
If you install IIS after installing .Net framework, you will need to run a command to register ASP.Net with IIS.

The command is, found in your .Net framework instllation directory:

c:\windows\microsoft.net\framework\<version>\aspnet_regiis.exe -i

web server

What's the server requirement if it has a database to around 30 users. Is 512 RAM OK?

There's no valid answer to this, you don't have anywhere near enough information here. Is this 30 users logging on and off every 2 seconds? Is the database holding fully searchable contents of the Library of Congress? Are you running the web server, SQL, Exchange, a proxy server, DNS and an Active Directory on this server?

Start with what you have,. If you need to, upgrade.

Jeff

Web Server

What Happens when

(1) A client requests a web page that contains client-side code from a web server.

(2) A client requests a web page that contains server-side code code from a web server.

a) page markup and client side code are sent to the client

b) server code executes on the server and resulting page markup is sent to the client.

In simple words:

(1) Simple server will serve the html and client side code in response to request.

(2) Server will execute the necessary process to serve the request and will serve the html and client side code(if any) in response to request.

when client side code is requested then it is done at the client side

when a server side code is there then it goes to the server, server will process th code and reply the client.

both are different

client side is mainly used for validation purpose and server side code is used for processing.

Right Ajay I am totally agree with you what was I mean to say that first time when your request is getting processed on the server. Once your request is processed and you have client script on the browser, then what you said is perfect.

(1) A client requests a web page that contains client-side code from a web server.

==> The client side code is sent by the server to the client. Client side script may be of the form of Javascript, jscript, vbscript etc. Third party plugins like Adobe Flash Player etc. (that processes swf files) are handled client-side. This means that the processing load happens on the client system's processor.

(2) A client requests a web page that contains server-side code code from a web server.

==> As explained above, server side code is handled by the server. The server is where the IIS is installed. The IIS handles the ASP.NET runtime engine. Must read this beautiful article ...http://aspnet.4guysfromrolla.com/articles/011404-1.aspx

I would also like to point out here, there there are situations where code seems to be handled client-side, but it actually is being handled server side...I'm talking about Ajax where partial postbacks are sent to the server (that means that the entire page is not sent for processing to the server, rather a partial page request is sent...this internally happens using Javascript's XMLHttpRequest object...view this for more...http://www.w3.org/TR/XMLHttpRequest/

HTH

Cheers

Vishal Khanna

(Pls mark as answer if reply helps)

Web server busy

Hi, I created access database and let people checkin and checkout. I created four buttons, but every time it seems that when people clcik the second one, it gives web server is busy message. It takes quite a while to retrive the page and then check in. It seems that not many people check in at that time. Would any expert look at my code? I really appreciate it and thanks!!!!

Sub Check_Test(sender as Object, e as EventArgs)



Dim currEmpNumber As String = employeeID.Text

currEmpNumber = checkUserInput(currEmpNumber.Trim())

strSQL="Select * from Employee WHERE IDEmployee= '" & currEmpNumber & "'"

call openDB()

Dim objDR as OleDbDataReader
Dim Cmd as New OleDbCommand(strSQL, connTemp)

objDR=Cmd.ExecuteReader(system.data.CommandBehavior.CloseConnection)


While objDR.Read()
currName=ValidateInputForDB(objDR("Name"))

End While

call CloseDB()

Call OpenDB()

strSQL="Select IDEmployee from Employee WHERE IDEmployee= '" & currEmpNumber & "'"
Dim myCommand1 As New OleDbCommand(strSQL, connTemp)
currEmpID = myCommand1.ExecuteScalar()
If currEmpID = 0 Then
labelMessage.text = "<blockquote><font size=6 color='blue'><b>* Wrong No! Please try again!</font>"
labelMessage1.visible=false


Else
Dim myCountEmployee as Int32 = 0


strSQL="Select count(*) from Clock WHERE IDEmployee= '" & currEmpNumber & "' and serverDate = '" & currServerDate & "'"
Dim myCommand3 As New OledbCommand(strSQL, connTemp)
myCountEmployee = myCommand3.ExecuteScalar()


If myCountEmployee = 0 Then

labelMessage.text = "<blockquote><font size=6 color='blue'><b>* Sorry! </font>"
labelMessage1.visible=false
else

If myCountEmployee > 0 Then

strSQL="UPDATE Clock SET OutWork1 = '" & currServerTime & "' WHERE IDEmployee= '" & currEmpNumber & "' and serverDate = '" & currServerDate & "' and Outwork1 = '' "

call InsertUpdate(strSQL)

call CloseDB()

End IF
end if
end if
labelMessage1.text ="Bye, " & cstr(currName) &"!" & " "


End Sub

hi,

i'm not an expert, i'm neither familiar with VB. I'm coding in c#, but it looks to me that you don't close the db connection every time.

If myCountEmployee > 0 Then

strSQL="UPDATE Clock SET OutWork1 = '" & currServerTime &"' WHERE IDEmployee= '" & currEmpNumber & "' and serverDate= '" & currServerDate & "' and Outwork1 = '' "

call InsertUpdate(strSQL)

call CloseDB()

End IF

it think the connection is closed only when there are any employees ?

And it is opened before the if, so it should be closed not in the if clause.

If my assumption is right, it is possible to run out of sql connections very soon, which may causes your problem.

If i'm wrong sorry for puzzling you more :)

Cheers,

Yani

Web Server and Database Server separated

Hi,

Here is the scenario. Our website is hosted by hosting company. We plan to host the database at our office. The website connects to our database at our office. Is this possible? Is there a performance issue?

Thanks.

Dennis

That certainly is possible.
Things to take into mind, you have a open connection to your database server to anyone on the intranet, so you have to secure the connection via firewall and IP access control list. You might also think about creating a Web Service at the location where your database is for the application on hosts machine to access your data. Connection to the service via SSL would be relatively secure.
Secondly, there will be a slowdown in perfermance since the performance of your website rely's on the speed of yours hosts connection, the speed of your connection, and traffic on both of your networks. A local connection is faster than a remote connection, especially for accessing large amounts of data and a high number of queries. So if your pipe from the host to your database location is not sufficient to support the traffic for you site there will be a performance issue.

It's likely possible (depending mostly on your database engine, and thefirewall situation between your office and the hosting company) butthere may be some pretty serious performance issues. The timethat it's going to take to get data across the Internet could besignificantly longer than over a LAN. Personally, I'd bepretty cautious about this configuration. Not that it won't work,but certainly, test it well.

Web server cluster related problem

We are running an ASP.NET application on a cluster of 3 web-servers, using
the Network Load Balancing feature of Application Center. We have
synchronized the machineKey in machine.config on the 3 web-servers, so we
can utilize a random algorithm for server selection for requests. The
application does not use either session state or application state.

We recently upgraded to .NET Framework 1.1 (including the hotfix for the
"doPostback bug"), and after that we experience a mysterious problem on our
production servers:

Let's call the servers A, B and C. Let's say you select a page (a GET
request), and it is served by either server A or B. The page contains a
form, so when you post it back and server C gets to handle the request, the
response appears to be like the original GET request. The page does not seem
to process the page as a POST request.

The same thing happens if the original page comes from server C, and the
postback is processed by server A or B.

Obviously, it seems that there is something wrong on server C.

We have checked everything we can think of. Among them the .NET Framework
installation, machine.config, and that the web application files are the
same.

Since this is a production environment, we are not allowed to use debug
tools. However, we have enabled tracing. When this problem occurs, we see
that
1) The form collection contains the posted data
2) That LoadViewState and ProcessPostData has been executed, both of which
are not executed on a GET request.
3) SessionId is unchanged

But even so, when the request is processed by the called page, it is
processed as a GET request.

Now I don't know where to keep on looking. Does it ring a bell for anyone?

Thanks,
HelgeAn ASP.NET webform detects if a request is a postback by comparing the
hash value in the viewstate of a page. This hash value is generated
by using a validation key. In the default setting, ASP.NET will
automatically generate an random validation key for each web server.
Thus, sending a POST request to a webform on a different web server
will not be recognized as a POST request because the validation key is
different.

Try changing the machine.config or web.config on each web server to
use a static validation key.

For example,

<machineKey validationKey="Some static key" validation="SHA1"/
Tommy,

"Helge Kalnes" <helge.kalnes@.electricfarm.no> wrote in message news:<ejjxuus#DHA.2072@.TK2MSFTNGP11.phx.gbl>...
> We are running an ASP.NET application on a cluster of 3 web-servers, using
> the Network Load Balancing feature of Application Center. We have
> synchronized the machineKey in machine.config on the 3 web-servers, so we
> can utilize a random algorithm for server selection for requests. The
> application does not use either session state or application state.
> We recently upgraded to .NET Framework 1.1 (including the hotfix for the
> "doPostback bug"), and after that we experience a mysterious problem on our
> production servers:
> Let's call the servers A, B and C. Let's say you select a page (a GET
> request), and it is served by either server A or B. The page contains a
> form, so when you post it back and server C gets to handle the request, the
> response appears to be like the original GET request. The page does not seem
> to process the page as a POST request.
> The same thing happens if the original page comes from server C, and the
> postback is processed by server A or B.
> Obviously, it seems that there is something wrong on server C.
> We have checked everything we can think of. Among them the .NET Framework
> installation, machine.config, and that the web application files are the
> same.
> Since this is a production environment, we are not allowed to use debug
> tools. However, we have enabled tracing. When this problem occurs, we see
> that
> 1) The form collection contains the posted data
> 2) That LoadViewState and ProcessPostData has been executed, both of which
> are not executed on a GET request.
> 3) SessionId is unchanged
> But even so, when the request is processed by the called page, it is
> processed as a GET request.
> Now I don't know where to keep on looking. Does it ring a bell for anyone?
> Thanks,
> Helge
Thanx, but as you can see in my original message we have already done that.
If the machineKeys hadn't been synchronized we would have got an exception.
And in addition when switching between servers A and B there is no problem.
We have of course double checked the machineKeys several times.

I found a KB article
(http://support.microsoft.com/defaul...b;EN-US;323744), but the
problem described here is related ASP.NET 1.0 and is supposed to be fixed in
1.1. I am not able to reproduce a problem as described in this article, but
it is of course possible that the problem is related to this.

:) Helge

"Tommy" <Websoftwares@.Hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:a85edaaf.0402241033.7fa789b8@.posting.google.c om...
> An ASP.NET webform detects if a request is a postback by comparing the
> hash value in the viewstate of a page. This hash value is generated
> by using a validation key. In the default setting, ASP.NET will
> automatically generate an random validation key for each web server.
> Thus, sending a POST request to a webform on a different web server
> will not be recognized as a POST request because the validation key is
> different.
> Try changing the machine.config or web.config on each web server to
> use a static validation key.
> For example,
> <machineKey validationKey="Some static key" validation="SHA1"/>
> Tommy,
> "Helge Kalnes" <helge.kalnes@.electricfarm.no> wrote in message
news:<ejjxuus#DHA.2072@.TK2MSFTNGP11.phx.gbl>...
> > We are running an ASP.NET application on a cluster of 3 web-servers,
using
> > the Network Load Balancing feature of Application Center. We have
> > synchronized the machineKey in machine.config on the 3 web-servers, so
we
> > can utilize a random algorithm for server selection for requests. The
> > application does not use either session state or application state.
> > We recently upgraded to .NET Framework 1.1 (including the hotfix for the
> > "doPostback bug"), and after that we experience a mysterious problem on
our
> > production servers:
> > Let's call the servers A, B and C. Let's say you select a page (a GET
> > request), and it is served by either server A or B. The page contains a
> > form, so when you post it back and server C gets to handle the request,
the
> > response appears to be like the original GET request. The page does not
seem
> > to process the page as a POST request.
> > The same thing happens if the original page comes from server C, and the
> > postback is processed by server A or B.
> > Obviously, it seems that there is something wrong on server C.
> > We have checked everything we can think of. Among them the .NET
Framework
> > installation, machine.config, and that the web application files are the
> > same.
> > Since this is a production environment, we are not allowed to use debug
> > tools. However, we have enabled tracing. When this problem occurs, we
see
> > that
> > 1) The form collection contains the posted data
> > 2) That LoadViewState and ProcessPostData has been executed, both of
which
> > are not executed on a GET request.
> > 3) SessionId is unchanged
> > But even so, when the request is processed by the called page, it is
> > processed as a GET request.
> > Now I don't know where to keep on looking. Does it ring a bell for
anyone?
> > Thanks,
> > Helge

Web server Cluster and SESSION.

Hi everyone,
Will clustering of webservers affect SESSION states?
Is there a dotnet term for the above mentioned scenario?
Pls advise.
Thanks.
Posted Via mcse.ms Premium Usenet Newsgroup Services
----
** SPEED ** RETENTION ** COMPLETION ** ANONYMITY **
----
http://www.mcse.msYou can store your session in a SQL Server such that your web servers all
access the same store, however you have to note that everything you store in
the Session needs to be serialisable for that to work.
"Eric Layman" <namyalcire[at no spam]gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1174907530_3665@.sp6iad.superfeed.net...
> Hi everyone,
> Will clustering of webservers affect SESSION states?
> Is there a dotnet term for the above mentioned scenario?
> Pls advise.
> Thanks.
>
> Posted Via mcse.ms Premium Usenet Newsgroup Services
> ----
> ** SPEED ** RETENTION ** COMPLETION ** ANONYMITY **
> ----
> http://www.mcse.ms
in this case store the session in SQL
"Eric Layman" <namyalcire[at no spam]gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1174907530_3665@.sp6iad.superfeed.net...
> Hi everyone,
> Will clustering of webservers affect SESSION states?
> Is there a dotnet term for the above mentioned scenario?
> Pls advise.
> Thanks.
>
> Posted Via mcse.ms Premium Usenet Newsgroup Services
> ----
> ** SPEED ** RETENTION ** COMPLETION ** ANONYMITY **
> ----
> http://www.mcse.ms
Thanks!
But, is this step a must? Since this article was dated 12 Jun 06
http://support.microsoft.com/kb/317604
Currently on .net 1.1
"Aidy" <aidy@.noemail.xxxa.com> wrote in message
news:uNudnTD9nLqeMJrbnZ2dnUVZ8sWhnZ2d@.bt
.com...
> You can store your session in a SQL Server such that your web servers all
> access the same store, however you have to note that everything you store
> in the Session needs to be serialisable for that to work.
> "Eric Layman" <namyalcire[at no spam]gmail.com> wrote in message
> news:1174907530_3665@.sp6iad.superfeed.net...
>
Posted Via mcse.ms Premium Usenet Newsgroup Services
----
** SPEED ** RETENTION ** COMPLETION ** ANONYMITY **
----
http://www.mcse.ms
State Server can also do the job for clustered servers.
ASP.NET applications support maintaining session state on a
centralized session state server *or* on a server running SQL Server.
Because the session state is managed centrally,
any cluster host can recover session state information.
Juan T. Llibre, asp.net MVP
asp.net faq : http://asp.net.do/faq/
foros de asp.net, en espaol : http://asp.net.do/foros/
===================================
"Aidy" <aidy@.noemail.xxxa.com> wrote in message news:uNudnTD9nLqeMJrbnZ2dnUVZ8sWhnZ2d@.bt
.co
m...
> You can store your session in a SQL Server such that your web servers all
access the same store,
> however you have to note that everything you store in the Session needs to
be serialisable for
> that to work.
> "Eric Layman" <namyalcire[at no spam]gmail.com> wrote in message
> news:1174907530_3665@.sp6iad.superfeed.net...
Eric, please see my just-sent reply.
You can also use ASP.NET's State Server to maintain state in a cluster.
...and, please fix your clock.
You're posting 15 hours into the future. :-)
Thanks.
Juan T. Llibre, asp.net MVP
asp.net faq : http://asp.net.do/faq/
foros de asp.net, en espaol : http://asp.net.do/foros/
===================================
"Eric Layman" <namyalcire[at no spam]gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1174911829_3689@.sp6iad.superfeed.net...
> Thanks!
> But, is this step a must? Since this article was dated 12 Jun 06
> http://support.microsoft.com/kb/317604
> Currently on .net 1.1
>
> "Aidy" <aidy@.noemail.xxxa.com> wrote in message news:uNudnTD9nLqeMJrbnZ2dn
UVZ8sWhnZ2d@.bt.com...
>
> Posted Via mcse.ms Premium Usenet Newsgroup Services
> ----
> ** SPEED ** RETENTION ** COMPLETION ** ANONYMITY **
> ---- [url]http://www.mcse.ms[
/url]
"Juan T. Llibre" <nomailreplies@.nowhere.com> wrote in message
news:uREqFI6bHHA.3648@.TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...

> State Server can also do the job for clustered servers.
> ASP.NET applications support maintaining session state on a
> centralized session state server *or* on a server running SQL Server.
> Because the session state is managed centrally,
> any cluster host can recover session state information.
Do you have any thoughts as to when to use one and when to use the other...?
There's a fair bit of information on the net about each individually, but
there doesn't seem to be much on which is the more suitable according to
infrastructure etc...
Thanks Juan!
What about implementation of cookies? I doubt cookies has the hassle of
sessions in a web cluster.
Since we are doing it for a company and the company is very strict about its
intellecutal properties; i doubt they are going to let us lay a finger on
their servers.
Im not 15 hours ahead. This is my local time. Its 9pm @. where I'm located
right now. GMT+8
"Juan T. Llibre" <nomailreplies@.nowhere.com> wrote in message
news:%23sDW5I6bHHA.4808@.TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
> Eric, please see my just-sent reply.
> You can also use ASP.NET's State Server to maintain state in a cluster.
> ...and, please fix your clock.
> You're posting 15 hours into the future. :-)
> Thanks.
>
> Juan T. Llibre, asp.net MVP
> asp.net faq : http://asp.net.do/faq/
> foros de asp.net, en espaol : http://asp.net.do/foros/
> ===================================
> "Eric Layman" <namyalcire[at no spam]gmail.com> wrote in message
> news:1174911829_3689@.sp6iad.superfeed.net...
>
>
Posted Via mcse.ms Premium Usenet Newsgroup Services
----
** SPEED ** RETENTION ** COMPLETION ** ANONYMITY **
----
http://www.mcse.ms
re:
> Do you have any thoughts as to when to use one and when to use the other...?[/colo
r]
Couldn't you ask an easier question ?
That's a tough nut to crack.
:-)
All in all, I think it would depend on the size of the cluster.
Small and medium-sized clusters could probably make do with State Server.
For very large, and I mean *very* large, applications in large clusters,
redundant SQL Servers are called for.
That would mean : "a cluster of SQL Servers keeping state for a cluster of w
eb servers".
The scalability of *that* configuration runs into many millions of hits dail
y.
Caveat : when using SQL Server mode, objects stored in session state
are serialised and deserialised when a request is processed.
You cannot store objects which do not support serialisation in session state
,
if you use SQL Server, so that's something to keep in mind when programming.
Juan T. Llibre, asp.net MVP
asp.net faq : http://asp.net.do/faq/
foros de asp.net, en espaol : http://asp.net.do/foros/
===================================
"Mark Rae" <mark@.markNOSPAMrae.com> wrote in message news:%23VABvO6bHHA.4836@.TK2MSFTNGP03.p
hx.gbl...
> "Juan T. Llibre" <nomailreplies@.nowhere.com> wrote in message
> news:uREqFI6bHHA.3648@.TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...
>
> Do you have any thoughts as to when to use one and when to use the other..
.?
> There's a fair bit of information on the net about each individually, but
there doesn't seem to be
> much on which is the more suitable according to infrastructure etc...
>
re:
> What about implementation of cookies? I doubt cookies has the hassle of sessions i
n a web cluster.
You can use both cookies and cookieless sessions.
re:
> Im not 15 hours ahead. This is my local time. GMT+8
This message is stamped a bit after midnight tonight.
:-)
Check your Windows timezone setting.
OE says you posted your message on Mon, 26 Mar 2007 21:10:26 -0700
That's GMT -7, not GMT +8 ( which adds up to the 15 hour difference we're se
eing).
What's your physical location ?
Juan T. Llibre, asp.net MVP
asp.net faq : http://asp.net.do/faq/
foros de asp.net, en espaol : http://asp.net.do/foros/
===================================
"Eric Layman" <namyalcire[at no spam]gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1174914330_3705@.sp6iad.superfeed.net...
> Thanks Juan!
> What about implementation of cookies? I doubt cookies has the hassle of se
ssions in a web cluster.
> Since we are doing it for a company and the company is very strict about i
ts intellecutal
> properties; i doubt they are going to let us lay a finger on their servers
.
> Im not 15 hours ahead. This is my local time. Its 9pm @. where I'm located
right now. GMT+8
> "Juan T. Llibre" <nomailreplies@.nowhere.com> wrote in message
> news:%23sDW5I6bHHA.4808@.TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
>
> Posted Via mcse.ms Premium Usenet Newsgroup Services
> ----
> ** SPEED ** RETENTION ** COMPLETION ** ANONYMITY **
> ---- [url]http://www.mcse.ms[
/url]

Web server Cluster and SESSION.

Hi everyone,

Will clustering of webservers affect SESSION states?

Is there a dotnet term for the above mentioned scenario?

Pls advise.

Thanks.

Posted Via Usenet.com Premium Usenet Newsgroup Services
------------------
** SPEED ** RETENTION ** COMPLETION ** ANONYMITY **
------------------
http://www.usenet.comYou can store your session in a SQL Server such that your web servers all
access the same store, however you have to note that everything you store in
the Session needs to be serialisable for that to work.

"Eric Layman" <namyalcire[at no spam]gmail.comwrote in message
news:1174907530_3665@.sp6iad.superfeed.net...

Quote:

Originally Posted by

Hi everyone,
>
Will clustering of webservers affect SESSION states?
>
Is there a dotnet term for the above mentioned scenario?
>
Pls advise.
>
Thanks.
>
>
Posted Via Usenet.com Premium Usenet Newsgroup Services
------------------
** SPEED ** RETENTION ** COMPLETION ** ANONYMITY **
------------------
http://www.usenet.com

in this case store the session in SQL

"Eric Layman" <namyalcire[at no spam]gmail.comwrote in message
news:1174907530_3665@.sp6iad.superfeed.net...

Quote:

Originally Posted by

Hi everyone,
>
Will clustering of webservers affect SESSION states?
>
Is there a dotnet term for the above mentioned scenario?
>
Pls advise.
>
Thanks.
>
>
Posted Via Usenet.com Premium Usenet Newsgroup Services
------------------
** SPEED ** RETENTION ** COMPLETION ** ANONYMITY **
------------------
http://www.usenet.com

Thanks!

But, is this step a must? Since this article was dated 12 Jun 06

http://support.microsoft.com/kb/317604
Currently on .net 1.1

"Aidy" <aidy@.noemail.xxxa.comwrote in message
news:uNudnTD9nLqeMJrbnZ2dnUVZ8sWhnZ2d@.bt.com...

Quote:

Originally Posted by

You can store your session in a SQL Server such that your web servers all
access the same store, however you have to note that everything you store
in the Session needs to be serialisable for that to work.
>
"Eric Layman" <namyalcire[at no spam]gmail.comwrote in message
news:1174907530_3665@.sp6iad.superfeed.net...

Quote:

Originally Posted by

>Hi everyone,
>>
>Will clustering of webservers affect SESSION states?
>>
>Is there a dotnet term for the above mentioned scenario?
>>
>Pls advise.
>>
>Thanks.
>>
>>
>Posted Via Usenet.com Premium Usenet Newsgroup Services
>------------------
> ** SPEED ** RETENTION ** COMPLETION ** ANONYMITY **
>------------------
>http://www.usenet.com

>
>

Posted Via Usenet.com Premium Usenet Newsgroup Services
------------------
** SPEED ** RETENTION ** COMPLETION ** ANONYMITY **
------------------
http://www.usenet.com
Eric, please see my just-sent reply.
You can also use ASP.NET's State Server to maintain state in a cluster.

...and, please fix your clock.
You're posting 15 hours into the future. :-)

Thanks.

Juan T. Llibre, asp.net MVP
asp.net faq : http://asp.net.do/faq/
foros de asp.net, en espaol : http://asp.net.do/foros/
===================================
"Eric Layman" <namyalcire[at no spam]gmail.comwrote in message
news:1174911829_3689@.sp6iad.superfeed.net...

Quote:

Originally Posted by

Thanks!
>
But, is this step a must? Since this article was dated 12 Jun 06
>
http://support.microsoft.com/kb/317604
>
Currently on .net 1.1
>
>
>
"Aidy" <aidy@.noemail.xxxa.comwrote in message news:uNudnTD9nLqeMJrbnZ2dnUVZ8sWhnZ2d@.bt.com...

Quote:

Originally Posted by

>You can store your session in a SQL Server such that your web servers all access the same store,
>however you have to note that everything you store in the Session needs to be serialisable for
>that to work.
>>
>"Eric Layman" <namyalcire[at no spam]gmail.comwrote in message
>news:1174907530_3665@.sp6iad.superfeed.net...

Quote:

Originally Posted by

>>Hi everyone,
>>>
>>Will clustering of webservers affect SESSION states?
>>>
>>Is there a dotnet term for the above mentioned scenario?
>>>
>>Pls advise.
>>>
>>Thanks.
>>>
>>>
>>Posted Via Usenet.com Premium Usenet Newsgroup Services
>>------------------
>> ** SPEED ** RETENTION ** COMPLETION ** ANONYMITY **
>>------------------ http://www.usenet.com

>>
>>

>
>
>
Posted Via Usenet.com Premium Usenet Newsgroup Services
------------------
** SPEED ** RETENTION ** COMPLETION ** ANONYMITY **
------------------ http://www.usenet.com

State Server can also do the job for clustered servers.

ASP.NET applications support maintaining session state on a
centralized session state server *or* on a server running SQL Server.

Because the session state is managed centrally,
any cluster host can recover session state information.

Juan T. Llibre, asp.net MVP
asp.net faq : http://asp.net.do/faq/
foros de asp.net, en espaol : http://asp.net.do/foros/
===================================
"Aidy" <aidy@.noemail.xxxa.comwrote in message news:uNudnTD9nLqeMJrbnZ2dnUVZ8sWhnZ2d@.bt.com...

Quote:

Originally Posted by

You can store your session in a SQL Server such that your web servers all access the same store,
however you have to note that everything you store in the Session needs to be serialisable for
that to work.

Quote:

Originally Posted by

"Eric Layman" <namyalcire[at no spam]gmail.comwrote in message
news:1174907530_3665@.sp6iad.superfeed.net...

Quote:

Originally Posted by

>Hi everyone,
>>
>Will clustering of webservers affect SESSION states?
>>
>Is there a dotnet term for the above mentioned scenario?
>>
>Pls advise.
>>
>Thanks.

"Juan T. Llibre" <nomailreplies@.nowhere.comwrote in message
news:uREqFI6bHHA.3648@.TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...

Quote:

Originally Posted by

State Server can also do the job for clustered servers.
>
ASP.NET applications support maintaining session state on a
centralized session state server *or* on a server running SQL Server.
>
Because the session state is managed centrally,
any cluster host can recover session state information.

Do you have any thoughts as to when to use one and when to use the other...?

There's a fair bit of information on the net about each individually, but
there doesn't seem to be much on which is the more suitable according to
infrastructure etc...
Thanks Juan!

What about implementation of cookies? I doubt cookies has the hassle of
sessions in a web cluster.

Since we are doing it for a company and the company is very strict about its
intellecutal properties; i doubt they are going to let us lay a finger on
their servers.

Im not 15 hours ahead. This is my local time. Its 9pm @. where I'm located
right now. GMT+8

"Juan T. Llibre" <nomailreplies@.nowhere.comwrote in message
news:%23sDW5I6bHHA.4808@.TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...

Quote:

Originally Posted by

Eric, please see my just-sent reply.
You can also use ASP.NET's State Server to maintain state in a cluster.
>
...and, please fix your clock.
You're posting 15 hours into the future. :-)
>
Thanks.
>
>
>
Juan T. Llibre, asp.net MVP
asp.net faq : http://asp.net.do/faq/
foros de asp.net, en espaol : http://asp.net.do/foros/
===================================
"Eric Layman" <namyalcire[at no spam]gmail.comwrote in message
news:1174911829_3689@.sp6iad.superfeed.net...

Quote:

Originally Posted by

>Thanks!
>>
>But, is this step a must? Since this article was dated 12 Jun 06
>>
>http://support.microsoft.com/kb/317604
>>
>Currently on .net 1.1
>>
>>
>>
>"Aidy" <aidy@.noemail.xxxa.comwrote in message
>news:uNudnTD9nLqeMJrbnZ2dnUVZ8sWhnZ2d@.bt.com...

Quote:

Originally Posted by

>>You can store your session in a SQL Server such that your web servers
>>all access the same store, however you have to note that everything you
>>store in the Session needs to be serialisable for that to work.
>>>
>>"Eric Layman" <namyalcire[at no spam]gmail.comwrote in message
>>news:1174907530_3665@.sp6iad.superfeed.net...
>>>Hi everyone,
>>
>>>Will clustering of webservers affect SESSION states?
>>
>>>Is there a dotnet term for the above mentioned scenario?
>>
>>>Pls advise.
>>
>>>Thanks.
>>
>>
>>>Posted Via Usenet.com Premium Usenet Newsgroup Services
>>>------------------
>>> ** SPEED ** RETENTION ** COMPLETION ** ANONYMITY **
>>>------------------
>>>http://www.usenet.com
>>>
>>>

>>
>>
>>
>Posted Via Usenet.com Premium Usenet Newsgroup Services
>------------------
> ** SPEED ** RETENTION ** COMPLETION ** ANONYMITY **
>------------------
>http://www.usenet.com

>
>
>

Posted Via Usenet.com Premium Usenet Newsgroup Services
------------------
** SPEED ** RETENTION ** COMPLETION ** ANONYMITY **
------------------
http://www.usenet.com
re:

Quote:

Originally Posted by

Do you have any thoughts as to when to use one and when to use the other...?

Couldn't you ask an easier question ?
That's a tough nut to crack.

:-)

All in all, I think it would depend on the size of the cluster.

Small and medium-sized clusters could probably make do with State Server.

For very large, and I mean *very* large, applications in large clusters,
redundant SQL Servers are called for.

That would mean : "a cluster of SQL Servers keeping state for a cluster of web servers".
The scalability of *that* configuration runs into many millions of hits daily.

Caveat : when using SQL Server mode, objects stored in session state
are serialised and deserialised when a request is processed.

You cannot store objects which do not support serialisation in session state,
if you use SQL Server, so that's something to keep in mind when programming.

Juan T. Llibre, asp.net MVP
asp.net faq : http://asp.net.do/faq/
foros de asp.net, en espaol : http://asp.net.do/foros/
===================================
"Mark Rae" <mark@.markNOSPAMrae.comwrote in message news:%23VABvO6bHHA.4836@.TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl...

Quote:

Originally Posted by

"Juan T. Llibre" <nomailreplies@.nowhere.comwrote in message
news:uREqFI6bHHA.3648@.TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...
>

Quote:

Originally Posted by

>State Server can also do the job for clustered servers.
>>
>ASP.NET applications support maintaining session state on a
>centralized session state server *or* on a server running SQL Server.
>>
>Because the session state is managed centrally,
>any cluster host can recover session state information.

>
Do you have any thoughts as to when to use one and when to use the other...?
>
There's a fair bit of information on the net about each individually, but there doesn't seem to be
much on which is the more suitable according to infrastructure etc...
>

re:

Quote:

Originally Posted by

What about implementation of cookies? I doubt cookies has the hassle of sessions in a web cluster.

You can use both cookies and cookieless sessions.

re:

Quote:

Originally Posted by

Im not 15 hours ahead. This is my local time. GMT+8

This message is stamped a bit after midnight tonight.

:-)

Check your Windows timezone setting.
OE says you posted your message on Mon, 26 Mar 2007 21:10:26 -0700

That's GMT -7, not GMT +8 ( which adds up to the 15 hour difference we're seeing).
What's your physical location ?

Juan T. Llibre, asp.net MVP
asp.net faq : http://asp.net.do/faq/
foros de asp.net, en espaol : http://asp.net.do/foros/
===================================
"Eric Layman" <namyalcire[at no spam]gmail.comwrote in message
news:1174914330_3705@.sp6iad.superfeed.net...

Quote:

Originally Posted by

Thanks Juan!
>
What about implementation of cookies? I doubt cookies has the hassle of sessions in a web cluster.
>
Since we are doing it for a company and the company is very strict about its intellecutal
properties; i doubt they are going to let us lay a finger on their servers.
>
Im not 15 hours ahead. This is my local time. Its 9pm @. where I'm located right now. GMT+8
>
"Juan T. Llibre" <nomailreplies@.nowhere.comwrote in message
news:%23sDW5I6bHHA.4808@.TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...

Quote:

Originally Posted by

>Eric, please see my just-sent reply.
>You can also use ASP.NET's State Server to maintain state in a cluster.
>>
>...and, please fix your clock.
>You're posting 15 hours into the future. :-)
>>
>Thanks.
>>
>>
>>
>Juan T. Llibre, asp.net MVP
>asp.net faq : http://asp.net.do/faq/
>foros de asp.net, en espaol : http://asp.net.do/foros/
>===================================
>"Eric Layman" <namyalcire[at no spam]gmail.comwrote in message
>news:1174911829_3689@.sp6iad.superfeed.net...

Quote:

Originally Posted by

>>Thanks!
>>>
>>But, is this step a must? Since this article was dated 12 Jun 06
>>>
>>http://support.microsoft.com/kb/317604
>>>
>>Currently on .net 1.1
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>"Aidy" <aidy@.noemail.xxxa.comwrote in message news:uNudnTD9nLqeMJrbnZ2dnUVZ8sWhnZ2d@.bt.com...
>>>You can store your session in a SQL Server such that your web servers all access the same
>>>store, however you have to note that everything you store in the Session needs to be
>>>serialisable for that to work.
>>
>>>"Eric Layman" <namyalcire[at no spam]gmail.comwrote in message
>>>news:1174907530_3665@.sp6iad.superfeed.net...
>>Hi everyone,
>>
>>Will clustering of webservers affect SESSION states?
>>
>>Is there a dotnet term for the above mentioned scenario?
>>
>>Pls advise.
>>
>>Thanks.
>>
>>
>>Posted Via Usenet.com Premium Usenet Newsgroup Services
>>------------------
>> ** SPEED ** RETENTION ** COMPLETION ** ANONYMITY **
>>------------------ http://www.usenet.com
>>
>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>Posted Via Usenet.com Premium Usenet Newsgroup Services
>>------------------
>> ** SPEED ** RETENTION ** COMPLETION ** ANONYMITY **
>>------------------ http://www.usenet.com

>>
>>
>>

>
>
>
Posted Via Usenet.com Premium Usenet Newsgroup Services
------------------
** SPEED ** RETENTION ** COMPLETION ** ANONYMITY **
------------------ http://www.usenet.com

"Juan T. Llibre" <nomailreplies@.nowhere.comwrote in message
news:OzTLGs6bHHA.1300@.TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl...

Quote:

Originally Posted by

re:

Quote:

Originally Posted by

>Do you have any thoughts as to when to use one and when to use the
>other...?

>
Couldn't you ask an easier question ?

:-)

Quote:

Originally Posted by

Caveat : when using SQL Server mode, objects stored in session state
are serialised and deserialised when a request is processed.
>
You cannot store objects which do not support serialisation in session
state,
if you use SQL Server, so that's something to keep in mind when
programming.

Ah... that sounds like a bit of a "gotcha" - thanks for that...
Thus wrote Mark,

Quote:

Originally Posted by

"Juan T. Llibre" <nomailreplies@.nowhere.comwrote in message
news:uREqFI6bHHA.3648@.TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...
>

Quote:

Originally Posted by

>State Server can also do the job for clustered servers.
>>
>ASP.NET applications support maintaining session state on a
>centralized session state server *or* on a server running SQL Server.
>>
>Because the session state is managed centrally,
>any cluster host can recover session state information.

Do you have any thoughts as to when to use one and when to use the
other...?
>
There's a fair bit of information on the net about each individually,
but there doesn't seem to be much on which is the more suitable
according to infrastructure etc...

StateServer cannot be clustered, so it introduces a single point of failure,
making any cluster in front of it rather moot ;-)

Cheers,
--
Joerg Jooss
news-reply@.joergjooss.de
re:

Quote:

Originally Posted by

StateServer cannot be clustered, so it introduces a single point of failure

Yes. That's why I said that it's only good for small/medium websites
( which don't require clustered web servers... )

Juan T. Llibre, asp.net MVP
asp.net faq : http://asp.net.do/faq/
foros de asp.net, en espaol : http://asp.net.do/foros/
===================================
"Joerg Jooss" <news-reply@.joergjooss.dewrote in message
news:94fc50716ed588c93e0d7f6d3228@.msnews.microsoft .com...

Quote:

Originally Posted by

Thus wrote Mark,
>

Quote:

Originally Posted by

>"Juan T. Llibre" <nomailreplies@.nowhere.comwrote in message
>news:uREqFI6bHHA.3648@.TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...
>>

Quote:

Originally Posted by

>>State Server can also do the job for clustered servers.
>>>
>>ASP.NET applications support maintaining session state on a
>>centralized session state server *or* on a server running SQL Server.
>>>
>>Because the session state is managed centrally,
>>any cluster host can recover session state information.

>Do you have any thoughts as to when to use one and when to use the
>other...?
>>
>There's a fair bit of information on the net about each individually,
>but there doesn't seem to be much on which is the more suitable
>according to infrastructure etc...

>
StateServer cannot be clustered, so it introduces a single point of failure, making any cluster in
front of it rather moot ;-)
>
Cheers,
--
Joerg Jooss
news-reply@.joergjooss.de
>
>

Yes, it will. Look into two options:
1) ASP.NET State Server
2) SQL Server Session State option
Peter

--
Site: http://www.eggheadcafe.com
UnBlog: http://petesbloggerama.blogspot.com
Short urls & more: http://ittyurl.net
"Eric Layman" wrote:

Quote:

Originally Posted by

Hi everyone,
>
Will clustering of webservers affect SESSION states?
>
Is there a dotnet term for the above mentioned scenario?
>
Pls advise.
>
Thanks.
>
>
>
Posted Via Usenet.com Premium Usenet Newsgroup Services
------------------
** SPEED ** RETENTION ** COMPLETION ** ANONYMITY **
------------------
http://www.usenet.com
>

Web server Busy Problem

hi,
I have an application that connect to another server when the user
press
a button but the problem is that if the user clicked the button many
times
and error page
" There are too many people accessing the Web site at this time. "

so i want a way to work around it so the user can't click the button
twice before IIS finish executing the first time code postback.

thanx,hi,
I meant to say that i want a way to let the user of a web application
press the button only one time before the request return back(the
process of postback take around 10 seconds). with in 10 seconds i don't
want the user to press the button again.
I thing you are fixing the thing that is not broken.

This message happens on IIS development version which comes with Windows XP
or Win2000 workstation.

Once you move your application to Windows Server edition you will not have
that problem.

George.

"Octopus0" <ahmadbsher@.gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1144049233.021016.107170@.i40g2000cwc.googlegr oups.com...
> hi,
> I have an application that connect to another server when the user
> press
> a button but the problem is that if the user clicked the button many
> times
> and error page
> " There are too many people accessing the Web site at this time. "
> so i want a way to work around it so the user can't click the button
> twice before IIS finish executing the first time code postback.
>
> thanx,

Web server Busy Problem

hi,
I have an application that connect to another server when the user
press
a button but the problem is that if the user clicked the button many
times
and error page
" There are too many people accessing the Web site at this time. "
so i want a way to work around it so the user can't click the button
twice before IIS finish executing the first time code postback.
thanx,hi,
I meant to say that i want a way to let the user of a web application
press the button only one time before the request return back(the
process of postback take around 10 seconds). with in 10 seconds i don't
want the user to press the button again.
I thing you are fixing the thing that is not broken.
This message happens on IIS development version which comes with Windows XP
or Win2000 workstation.
Once you move your application to Windows Server edition you will not have
that problem.
George.
"Octopus0" <ahmadbsher@.gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1144049233.021016.107170@.i40g2000cwc.googlegroups.com...
> hi,
> I have an application that connect to another server when the user
> press
> a button but the problem is that if the user clicked the button many
> times
> and error page
> " There are too many people accessing the Web site at this time. "
> so i want a way to work around it so the user can't click the button
> twice before IIS finish executing the first time code postback.
>
> thanx,
>

Web Server configuration details for .net framework 3.0

Hi all,

Can any one tell me the site where I can find the minimum
configurations required for a web server for .net framework 3.0 to
run?

The configurations like what IIS version doe this support... What is
the IE version required for this to run in the client.
What is the hardware configurations of web server and client systems
that is needed for .net framework to run?

Thanks in advance.
Swapna.A simple Google search of 'framework 3.0 requirements' provides most everything
you need. Your first few questions are answered by MSFT's deployment guide:

http://msdn2.microsoft.com/en-us/library/aa480173.aspx
HTH.

-dl

--
David R. Longnecker
Web Developer
http://blog.tiredstudent.com

Quote:

Originally Posted by

Hi all,
>
Can any one tell me the site where I can find the minimum
configurations required for a web server for .net framework 3.0 to
run?
>
The configurations like what IIS version doe this support... What is
the IE version required for this to run in the client.
What is the hardware configurations of web server and client systems
that is needed for .net framework to run?
Thanks in advance.
Swapna.

Web Server configuration details for .net framework 3.0

Hi all,
Can any one tell me the site where I can find the minimum
configurations required for a web server for .net framework 3.0 to
run?
The configurations like what IIS version doe this support... What is
the IE version required for this to run in the client.
What is the hardware configurations of web server and client systems
that is needed for .net framework to run?
Thanks in advance.
Swapna.A simple Google search of 'framework 3.0 requirements' provides most everyth
ing
you need. Your first few questions are answered by MSFT's deployment guide:
http://msdn2.microsoft.com/en-us/library/aa480173.aspx
HTH.
-dl
David R. Longnecker
Web Developer
http://blog.tiredstudent.com

> Hi all,
> Can any one tell me the site where I can find the minimum
> configurations required for a web server for .net framework 3.0 to
> run?
> The configurations like what IIS version doe this support... What is
> the IE version required for this to run in the client.
> What is the hardware configurations of web server and client systems
> that is needed for .net framework to run?
> Thanks in advance.
> Swapna.

Web server configuration

What steps do I have to go through to configure a web servers (that are
behind a load balancer) to use SQL server to manage the session state?
Thx...sonnyHere is an article about setting up the load balancing.
http://www.west-wind.com/presentati...0
03.asp
Here is an article about setting up sql session state.
http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?scid=kb%3B[LN]%3BQ317604
http://support.microsoft.com/defaul...kb;EN-US;311209
HTH,
bill
"sonny" <sonny@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:1F4A3EE3-68A4-451D-8A0B-5E8457ABF32D@.microsoft.com...
> What steps do I have to go through to configure a web servers (that are
> behind a load balancer) to use SQL server to manage the session state?
> Thx...sonny

Web Server Config

.NET Framework is installed in IIS and it uses its Default Installation ie. everything is in inetpub/wwwroot.

Everyone worth their 2 cents will tell you that an experienced web administrator will change the default folder name of inetpub/wwwroot as the basic DOS attack is launched from there.

If the web server has its wwwroot name changed to something else other than default, asp.net will NOT work with the Default .NET Framework installation and because asp.net is designed to work with classic asp, we are not supposed to change the asp.net default configuration from the IIS MMC. We are supposed to do it with the XML-based machine.config file

Does anyone know how to change it so the ASP.NET will work on aspx pages in a web folder changed from inetpub/wwwroot ?I'm not much an admin but couldn't you just create a website in a directory other than wwwroot and delete the default all through IIS?
you should be able to create a virtual directory for your app anywhere you want... Unless I dont quite understand what you are asking.:confused:
True Cander, ASP.NET will work on any Website and any virtual directory.

"Everyone worth their 2 cents will tell you that an experienced web administrator will change the default folder name of inetpub/wwwroot as the basic DOS attack is launched from there."

SoftwareMaker, what you're saying doesn't make any sence at all. What has the name of your website or the mapping of that website to a physical location on the filesystem to do with a DOS attack, nothing !
Ok, let me explain.

A basic DOS attack comes from fooling the Server to execute a command on the server...eg.cmd.exe...(execute your command here)

In IIS 4 without any patches, an attack can be sent to the server from the browser address bar to run a command in the server, Of course, any commands have to be valid and run from a valid directory. In IIS 4, the server could not parse apart certain strings...a long story...(fool the // with %20 or so on). So technically if you can get to the root of the directory, bingo you can execute the cmd.exe command With IIS, the root is always inetpub/wwwroot

Experienced administrators with enterprises changes all the default settings of the default folder. (of couse enterprises dont use IIS for their server) to escape this form of attack. Of course, the new server software is better now BUT still ppl do change the default name of the webroot juz to be safe...

Ask around and you will see most of them do.
SoftwareMaker from the sounds of it, the method of your defense only goes to the level that you nest your home directory in. On top of it, I think that any web admin "worth their 2 cents" would actually apply any patches the second they're available.
Yep..you're right Shawn.

Anyways seems ppl take offense at my statement abt the 2cents worth...Its just a figure of speech. It is not meant to offend anyone.
A basic DOS attack comes from fooling the Server to execute a command on the server...eg.cmd.exe...(execute your command here)

SoftwareMaker, that's not true !!

What you're talking about is a know buffer overflow bug in IIS. A DOS attack is a totally different thing.

DOS attacks occur when a system is flooded with traffic to the point that it is unable to process legitimate service requests.
OK gijsj

you're right...

I have managed to solve the problem of this thread.

Thanks everyone

web server debug error

I have a project that I am trying to run from a server. When I attempt this, I get an error :

Error while trying to run project : Unable to start debugging on the web server. Would you like to disable future attempts to debug ASP.NET pages for this project?

I know this problem has been posted already and I tried the solution that I found there (running an ASP register command) and I am still getting the same result. The weird thing is that I have a different program that someone else wrote on a different computer that runs with absolutely no problems on that same web server. What could the problem be?Originally posted by JonathanSchmidt
I have a project that I am trying to run from a server. When I attempt this, I get an error :

Error while trying to run project : Unable to start debugging on the web server. Would you like to disable future attempts to debug ASP.NET pages for this project?

Seen it happen if the folder the app is in isn't a web folder(virtual folder I believe they call it)

In Administrative Tools....Open "Internet Services Manager". Then find the folder on the left. If it's a regular folder(you'll notice the difference), Right click and select "Properties". In the dialog box, click the "Create" button. Then click ok and try again.

John
Unfortunately, thats not the problem. I already promoted it to a regular web app. This is so annoying. I have tried every other solution to this problem that I have found posted on the web, and nothing works. I think my server hates me. I might as well get fired. AAAAHHHHH!!!!!
Silly question but have you stopped and started IIS since you set up the Virtual Directory?
yup
Are you trying to develop and debug on a different computer than where you webserver is located?
Try this..

Register the aspnet_isapi.dll using regsvr32
Make sure you have debug="true" in your web.config file of the application.
Dear kprashan

Thank you very much, your answer help me to solve 1 week problem.

please check your email.
hi Jonathan,
Got the solution?. I'm also getting the same error.

Error while trying to run project : Unable to start debugging on the web server. Would you like to disable future attempts to debug ASP.NET pages for this project?

if I press Yes, then the project can run afterwards. but then
the break points and debugging would not possible.:confused:

any ideas?

Web Server Controls, Custom or

I'm relatively new to ASP .NET. While using all of the existing Web server controls available in the VS Designer I find myself wondering where are the fancy controls you see on some of the public web sites, such as Buttons with rounded corners, Tabbed pages, menus, etc. Do they have to be created as Custom Controls using the GDI ? Where does Dreamweaver fall into this issue? I have seen a few articles talking about the new version of Dreamweaver being used with .NET. Could anyone point me in the right direction to find out about using or creating these controls.
Thanks
CodeHead.
Well dreamweaver is nothing but an editor, which means just like FrontPage, or any other text editor that supports asp.net tags.
regards

Alot of the controls you are looking for are freely available. the microsoftInternet Explorer Controls for example, which include tab, treeview etc. Same goes for menus like theskmMenu and my own favorite theexcentrics world controls. All of these are free and can easily be put on your page.
Thanks to all, especially the links to all of the controls. Very Helpful !

Web Server Controls Templates - best practices

I am not sure if web server control templates are the way to go or not, but
I would like to get some opinions on the best way to go about this.

I have a web page where administrators will specify which users have access
to various reports. The page will display the report name and a list of
users who currently have access. The administrator will be able to add or
delete from this list of users, then save the results to the database.
Basically, I want to be able to add or remove items to this list on the
client side, and have the server recognize the additions. I would also like
to avoid postbacks to the server when not absolutely necessary.

I know how to do this with classic asp, but I am developing in .net and want
to do this the best way so others will have no trouble managing the code.

Should I be using repeaters, datalists, datagrids, or a completely different
approach?

Any advice that can be provided would be a huge help.

i.e.

Report Name: Monthly Financial Statement

Users:

John Doe
Susan Parker
Tom Clancy

<add user> <remove user> <save changesAlot of people get really anxious about doing postbacks to the server.
Unless you will have 1000+ people accessing this at the sametime, the
load on your server is negligable. I have had many apps that I had to
do multiple postbacks and I have never had a problem.

I would make it so, when you click the "add user" button, it sends the
reportID, userID to the server and execute an "AddUserToReport" method.

In other words, process each addition of a user to a report, right when
that one user is added. This is going to require less code on the
server side and less headache for you. If you do it the other way, you
will have to store a collection of values in the clients session, then
when they click "save changes" you'll have to iterate through the
collection and do multiple database calls anyways.

Just a suggestion, I always try to take the route that requires me to
code less, because thats less code to maintain later on, and easier to
read code.

my 2cents
Thanks.
This particular app will only have a handful of users, so the added network
traffic should be negligible.

What would you recomend using a control template, building the user list
with a loop, or some other method?

"DKode" <dkode8@.gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1139417436.694587.173730@.g47g2000cwa.googlegr oups.com...
> Alot of people get really anxious about doing postbacks to the server.
> Unless you will have 1000+ people accessing this at the sametime, the
> load on your server is negligable. I have had many apps that I had to
> do multiple postbacks and I have never had a problem.
> I would make it so, when you click the "add user" button, it sends the
> reportID, userID to the server and execute an "AddUserToReport" method.
> In other words, process each addition of a user to a report, right when
> that one user is added. This is going to require less code on the
> server side and less headache for you. If you do it the other way, you
> will have to store a collection of values in the clients session, then
> when they click "save changes" you'll have to iterate through the
> collection and do multiple database calls anyways.
> Just a suggestion, I always try to take the route that requires me to
> code less, because thats less code to maintain later on, and easier to
> read code.
> my 2cents
if you are talking about what method to use to populate the usercontrol
with the list of users that have access to that report, I personally
would use a datagrid, query your database to get a dataset of the users
for that report, then bind the datatable to the datagrid. then perhaps
put in a checkbox column in the datagrid, checking off users that
already have access, then as someone clicks a checkbox to add a user to
the report, attach the checkbox event and add ur code to add the user
to the database in the event handler for the checkbox.

there is always lots of different ways of solving a problem, but at
first glance and from what you described, this is the method I would
take. You might have other requirements in there that i'm not aware of.

Web Server Controls Templates - best practices

I am not sure if web server control templates are the way to go or not, but
I would like to get some opinions on the best way to go about this.
I have a web page where administrators will specify which users have access
to various reports. The page will display the report name and a list of
users who currently have access. The administrator will be able to add or
delete from this list of users, then save the results to the database.
Basically, I want to be able to add or remove items to this list on the
client side, and have the server recognize the additions. I would also like
to avoid postbacks to the server when not absolutely necessary.
I know how to do this with classic asp, but I am developing in .net and want
to do this the best way so others will have no trouble managing the code.
Should I be using repeaters, datalists, datagrids, or a completely different
approach?
Any advice that can be provided would be a huge help.
i.e.
Report Name: Monthly Financial Statement
Users:
John Doe
Susan Parker
Tom Clancy
<add user> <remove user> <save changes>Alot of people get really anxious about doing postbacks to the server.
Unless you will have 1000+ people accessing this at the sametime, the
load on your server is negligable. I have had many apps that I had to
do multiple postbacks and I have never had a problem.
I would make it so, when you click the "add user" button, it sends the
reportID, userID to the server and execute an "AddUserToReport" method.
In other words, process each addition of a user to a report, right when
that one user is added. This is going to require less code on the
server side and less headache for you. If you do it the other way, you
will have to store a collection of values in the clients session, then
when they click "save changes" you'll have to iterate through the
collection and do multiple database calls anyways.
Just a suggestion, I always try to take the route that requires me to
code less, because thats less code to maintain later on, and easier to
read code.
my 2cents
Thanks.
This particular app will only have a handful of users, so the added network
traffic should be negligible.
What would you recomend using a control template, building the user list
with a loop, or some other method?
"DKode" <dkode8@.gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1139417436.694587.173730@.g47g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
> Alot of people get really anxious about doing postbacks to the server.
> Unless you will have 1000+ people accessing this at the sametime, the
> load on your server is negligable. I have had many apps that I had to
> do multiple postbacks and I have never had a problem.
> I would make it so, when you click the "add user" button, it sends the
> reportID, userID to the server and execute an "AddUserToReport" method.
> In other words, process each addition of a user to a report, right when
> that one user is added. This is going to require less code on the
> server side and less headache for you. If you do it the other way, you
> will have to store a collection of values in the clients session, then
> when they click "save changes" you'll have to iterate through the
> collection and do multiple database calls anyways.
> Just a suggestion, I always try to take the route that requires me to
> code less, because thats less code to maintain later on, and easier to
> read code.
> my 2cents
>
if you are talking about what method to use to populate the usercontrol
with the list of users that have access to that report, I personally
would use a datagrid, query your database to get a dataset of the users
for that report, then bind the datatable to the datagrid. then perhaps
put in a checkbox column in the datagrid, checking off users that
already have access, then as someone clicks a checkbox to add a user to
the report, attach the checkbox event and add ur code to add the user
to the database in the event handler for the checkbox.
there is always lots of different ways of solving a problem, but at
first glance and from what you described, this is the method I would
take. You might have other requirements in there that i'm not aware of.

WEB SERVER error - connection could not be established

Can anyone help with the problem below?
Thanks.
-----------

Dear All,

I was attempting to open up one of my Web applications when I
received this message:
The Web server reported the following error when
attempting to create or open the Web project located at
URL: 'http:localhost/TravelLifeQuote'.'A connection could not be
established.

I tried reinstalling the IIS server, that did not help in terms of
establishing the connection. I also tried followed the recommended
help steps i.e. typing in 'aspnet_regiis /i' but unfortunately this
showed no effect.

Does anyone know how this problem can be solved. Your help would be
greatly appreciated.

Regards,

ReplyI tried reinstalling the IIS server, that did not help in terms of
establishing the connection. I also tried followed the recommended
help steps i.e. typing in 'aspnet_regiis /i' but unfortunately this
showed no effect.

---

Please try deleting the contents of the:
\Documents and Settings\<user>\VSWebCache\

Directory.

This might help.

Web Server Error

Hi
Just installed .net and when I open up a project. I get a message which says that "The specified sever is not running .net version 1.1. I wont be able to compile the projects". I checked add/remove programms , I have 1.1 framework installed. Whats Iam missing here.
Thankstry running aspnet_regiis.exe from the .NET framework's folder (under c:\winnt\ i believe)
it resides at:
%systemroot%\Microsoft.NET\Framework\v1.1.4322\aspnet_regiis.exe

To map a specific application to ASP.NET v1.1:
%systemroot%\Microsoft.NET\Framework\v1.1.4322\aspnet_regiis.exe –s W3SVC/1/ROOT/<applicationdir
Here's a link for more information:
http://www.asp.net/faq/SideBySide.aspx#2

Ciao
Chadwick

Web server error

Hi,

I am having a problem when I am making an ASP.Net Project. When I am making a new project, it is prompting for "Web Access Failed" and the explanation says

-----------------------------
The default Web access mode for this project is set to file share, but the project folder
at 'http://localhost/WebApplication1' cannot be opened with the path 'c:\inetpub\companyweb\WebApplication1'. The error returned was:

Unable to create Web project 'WebApplication1'. The file path
'c:\inetpub\companyweb\WebApplication1' does not correspond to the URL
'http://localhost/WebApplication1'. The two need to map to the same server location. HTTP Error 404:
Not Found

What would you like to do?
1. Retry using a different file share path
Location: c:\inetpub\companyweb\WebApplication1
2. Try to open the project with Frontpage Server Extensions
-----------------------------

I am using Windows 2003 Small Business Server Edition, I installed IIS and we are using our intranet pretty good. We are not having any problems with it. I am pretty sure that I have enough access because I am logon as an administrator. I also tried to put it in a different directory but to no avail. What seems to be the problem why I cannot make a new project in ASP.Net, any links, tutorial regarding this problem will be of great help. thank you.Windows 2003 Servers come in an extremely locked down state to begin with.
I have not tried starting a project on the server, but here is a good article that addresses your problem:
Creating ASP.NET VS.NET Projects in Windows Server 2003
gee tnx, ill try this one
oh no, i tried it but it still won't work, any other ideas? pls. help tnx

web server folder security

My ASP.Net app need write permission for a folder on the
web server. What confuses me is that I can only make it
work if I give it write permission to the server machine's
Users group. It doesn't work if I give the same permission
to the IUSR_<machine name> user. It's been my
understanding all along that it is the IUSR_<machine name>
running the web server process. Now I am lot. Can someone
explain it to me?

Thanks

fengI believe asp.net runs under the ASPNET user by default. Try giving that
user only rights.

"feng" <anonymous@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:2483701c45fa7$e1ecb4a0$a301280a@.phx.gbl...
> My ASP.Net app need write permission for a folder on the
> web server. What confuses me is that I can only make it
> work if I give it write permission to the server machine's
> Users group. It doesn't work if I give the same permission
> to the IUSR_<machine name> user. It's been my
> understanding all along that it is the IUSR_<machine name>
> running the web server process. Now I am lot. Can someone
> explain it to me?
> Thanks
> feng
It really depends on what you are doing. IUSR_MachineName is the anonymous
account. If you are truly running a process on behest of the anonymous user,
give IUSR_MachineName rights. In traditional ASP, IUSR_MachineName was a bit
more of a king.

In ASP .NET, there are some other accounts created to run behind the scenes
processes. For example, you have an ASPNET machine account. This account is
where much of the code runs (as well as the worker process). Giving this
account access is often more important than IUSR_MachineName.

I won't even mention IWAM_MachineName right now, as it could get a bit too
deep.

NOTE: ASPNET is a User, which is why giving access to Users works.

--
Gregory A. Beamer
MVP; MCP: +I, SE, SD, DBA

************************************************
Think Outside the Box!
************************************************
"feng" <anonymous@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:2483701c45fa7$e1ecb4a0$a301280a@.phx.gbl...
> My ASP.Net app need write permission for a folder on the
> web server. What confuses me is that I can only make it
> work if I give it write permission to the server machine's
> Users group. It doesn't work if I give the same permission
> to the IUSR_<machine name> user. It's been my
> understanding all along that it is the IUSR_<machine name>
> running the web server process. Now I am lot. Can someone
> explain it to me?
> Thanks
> feng

web server folder security

My ASP.Net app need write permission for a folder on the
web server. What confuses me is that I can only make it
work if I give it write permission to the server machine's
Users group. It doesn't work if I give the same permission
to the IUSR_<machine name> user. It's been my
understanding all along that it is the IUSR_<machine name>
running the web server process. Now I am lot. Can someone
explain it to me?
Thanks
fengI believe asp.net runs under the ASPNET user by default. Try giving that
user only rights.
"feng" <anonymous@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:2483701c45fa7$e1ecb4a0$a301280a@.phx
.gbl...
> My ASP.Net app need write permission for a folder on the
> web server. What confuses me is that I can only make it
> work if I give it write permission to the server machine's
> Users group. It doesn't work if I give the same permission
> to the IUSR_<machine name> user. It's been my
> understanding all along that it is the IUSR_<machine name>
> running the web server process. Now I am lot. Can someone
> explain it to me?
> Thanks
> feng
It really depends on what you are doing. IUSR_MachineName is the anonymous
account. If you are truly running a process on behest of the anonymous user,
give IUSR_MachineName rights. In traditional ASP, IUSR_MachineName was a bit
more of a king.
In ASP .NET, there are some other accounts created to run behind the scenes
processes. For example, you have an ASPNET machine account. This account is
where much of the code runs (as well as the worker process). Giving this
account access is often more important than IUSR_MachineName.
I won't even mention IWAM_MachineName right now, as it could get a bit too
deep.
NOTE: ASPNET is a User, which is why giving access to Users works.
Gregory A. Beamer
MVP; MCP: +I, SE, SD, DBA
****************************************
********
Think Outside the Box!
****************************************
********
"feng" <anonymous@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:2483701c45fa7$e1ecb4a0$a301280a@.phx
.gbl...
> My ASP.Net app need write permission for a folder on the
> web server. What confuses me is that I can only make it
> work if I give it write permission to the server machine's
> Users group. It doesn't work if I give the same permission
> to the IUSR_<machine name> user. It's been my
> understanding all along that it is the IUSR_<machine name>
> running the web server process. Now I am lot. Can someone
> explain it to me?
> Thanks
> feng

Web Server IP

Is there a simple way to obtain the IIS Server IP address (not the clients
using) with C# in ASP.NET? Our web servers are simple with only one IP. In
Classic ASP there was a one liner that would give it to you in a string
format...."Michael @. SGMS" <MichaelSGMS@.discussions.microsoft.comwrote in message
news:0E5480A1-7EF2-4838-9A32-E18E984A1231@.microsoft.com...

Quote:

Originally Posted by

Is there a simple way to obtain the IIS Server IP address (not the clients
using) with C# in ASP.NET? Our web servers are simple with only one IP.
In
Classic ASP there was a one liner that would give it to you in a string
format....

HttpContext.Current.Request.ServerVariables["LOCAL_ADDR"].ToString();

Web Server hangs

We have a problem with sites developed using Visual Studio 2003 that doesn't
occur with similar sites created in Notepad. Whilst browsing the site,
occasionally the site hangs completely and the only way to get it going
again is by restarting the web server.

Are there any known problems along these lines that people can point me in
the direction of?

ThanksHi,

From my experience the blame is always on our code. "Debugging tools for
windows" [1] got hang state that dump the running process and let you,
with symbols, find the lines that at least generate the problem.

By the way do you have multi threaded code in your application ?

[1] - http://www.microsoft.com/whdc/ddk/d...ng/default.mspx
Natty Gur[MVP]

blog : http://weblogs.asp.net/ngur
Mobile: +972-(0)58-888377

*** Sent via Developersdex http://www.developersdex.com ***
Don't just participate in USENET...get rewarded for it!

web server is not running ASP.net version 1.1

I just installed Visual Studio.Net 2003 and that is supposed to add that
asp.net 1.1 extension. I got an error message while opening ASP.NET
project.Error is :

"visual studio.net has detected that the specified web server is not running
ASP.net version 1.1. You will be unable to run asp.net web applications or
services."

I found a solution for this in 'Missing asp.net 1.1 in web extensions'
questioned by David as
----
1) Open Add/Remove program and uninstall dot net version 1.0.

2) If dot net version 1.0 is not in the list of installed programs, find the
following folder and delete it if found
C:\WINDOWS\Microsoft.NET\Framework\v1.0.3705

3) run the executable with the following option from command window:
C:\WINDOWS\Microsoft.NET\Framework\v1.1.xxxx\aspne t_regiis.exe -i

Once completed, the problem will no longer occur.
---
I did this.But even i am still getting the same problem.

Can any one tell me how to overcome this problem.One thing I am using 'Win
2000 Prof'

Thanks,
VenkatTry running this tool and use it to set the ASP.NET version?

http://www.denisbauer.com/NETTools/...onSwitcher.aspx

"Venkat" <Venkat@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:6B0474ED-0BC7-44E3-B737-814DF85975A4@.microsoft.com...
>I just installed Visual Studio.Net 2003 and that is supposed to add that
> asp.net 1.1 extension. I got an error message while opening ASP.NET
> project.Error is :
> "visual studio.net has detected that the specified web server is not
> running
> ASP.net version 1.1. You will be unable to run asp.net web applications or
> services."
> I found a solution for this in 'Missing asp.net 1.1 in web extensions'
> questioned by David as
> ----
> 1) Open Add/Remove program and uninstall dot net version 1.0.
> 2) If dot net version 1.0 is not in the list of installed programs, find
> the
> following folder and delete it if found
> C:\WINDOWS\Microsoft.NET\Framework\v1.0.3705
> 3) run the executable with the following option from command window:
> C:\WINDOWS\Microsoft.NET\Framework\v1.1.xxxx\aspne t_regiis.exe -i
> Once completed, the problem will no longer occur.
> ---
> I did this.But even i am still getting the same problem.
> Can any one tell me how to overcome this problem.One thing I am using 'Win
> 2000 Prof'
> Thanks,
> Venkat

web server is not running ASP.net version 1.1

I just installed Visual Studio.Net 2003 and that is supposed to add that
asp.net 1.1 extension. I got an error message while opening ASP.NET
project.Error is :
"visual studio.net has detected that the specified web server is not running
ASP.net version 1.1. You will be unable to run asp.net web applications or
services."
I found a solution for this in 'Missing asp.net 1.1 in web extensions'
questioned by David as
--
1) Open Add/Remove program and uninstall dot net version 1.0.
2) If dot net version 1.0 is not in the list of installed programs, find the
following folder and delete it if found
C:\WINDOWS\Microsoft.NET\Framework\v1.0.3705
3) run the executable with the following option from command window:
C:\WINDOWS\Microsoft.NET\Framework\v1.1.xxxx\aspnet_regiis.exe -i
Once completed, the problem will no longer occur.
--
I did this.But even i am still getting the same problem.
Can any one tell me how to overcome this problem.One thing I am using 'Win
2000 Prof'
Thanks,
VenkatTry running this tool and use it to set the ASP.NET version?
http://www.denisbauer.com/NETTools/...onSwitcher.aspx
"Venkat" <Venkat@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:6B0474ED-0BC7-44E3-B737-814DF85975A4@.microsoft.com...
>I just installed Visual Studio.Net 2003 and that is supposed to add that
> asp.net 1.1 extension. I got an error message while opening ASP.NET
> project.Error is :
> "visual studio.net has detected that the specified web server is not
> running
> ASP.net version 1.1. You will be unable to run asp.net web applications or
> services."
> I found a solution for this in 'Missing asp.net 1.1 in web extensions'
> questioned by David as
> --
> 1) Open Add/Remove program and uninstall dot net version 1.0.
> 2) If dot net version 1.0 is not in the list of installed programs, find
> the
> following folder and delete it if found
> C:\WINDOWS\Microsoft.NET\Framework\v1.0.3705
> 3) run the executable with the following option from command window:
> C:\WINDOWS\Microsoft.NET\Framework\v1.1.xxxx\aspnet_regiis.exe -i
> Once completed, the problem will no longer occur.
> --
> I did this.But even i am still getting the same problem.
> Can any one tell me how to overcome this problem.One thing I am using 'Win
> 2000 Prof'
> Thanks,
> Venkat
>