468,115 Members | 2,017 Online
Bytes | Developer Community
New Post

Home Posts Topics Members FAQ

Post your question to a community of 468,115 developers. It's quick & easy.

RE: It is an error to use a section registered asallowDefinition='MachineToApplication'

RE: It is an error to use a section registered as

There's an asp.net 1.1 vb.net vs 2003 solution under a virtual
directory on one of our sites. I can see the solution and project
files in under the folder where the IIS virtual directory is

The solution is working fine.

On the server, If I manually create a new virtual directory, create a
new application name for it under the same application pool and copy
the the full directory into the new virtual I can browse the solution.

However if I attempt to browse the logon.aspx page I get this error:

Configuration Error
Description: An error occurred during the processing of a
configuration file required to service this request. Please review the
specific error details below and modify your configuration file

Parser Error Message: It is an error to use a section registered as
allowDefinition='MachineToApplication' beyond application level. This
error can be caused by a virtual directory not being configured as an
application in IIS.

Source Error:
Line 37: by Microsoft that offers a single logon and core
profile services for member sites.
Line 38: -->
Line 39: <authentication mode="Forms" >
Line 40: <!-- <forms loginUrl="Logon.aspx" name="AuthCookie"
timeout="60" path="/auth" ></forms>-->
Line 41: </authentication>
I've checked IIS settings on the two virtuals and security on both
directories and they are identical. I've confirmed the new virtual in
IIS is an application. I've checked IIS security. the new directory is
parallel with the old directory.. not underneith it. I've done an IIS

I've seen many posts on this topic.. none has helped.

Will I need to recompile and redeploy the solution to the new
Virtual?.. I'd like to avoid this.

Looking at the original working solution, it has an AssemblyInfo.vb
file a specific GUID.. should this matter?

I see the issue as purely an IIS issue.. but can't figure out why.

Moving past this (at some point soon I hope). If this web server only
has extensions for ASP.NET 1.1, any reason a site cannot run both 1.1
and 2.0? Any way to compile this code using VS.NET 2005 and deploy
into this server if 2.0 is not available?

Oct 29 '08 #1
0 1149

This discussion thread is closed

Replies have been disabled for this discussion.

Similar topics

reply views Thread by a | last post: by
2 posts views Thread by menkaur | last post: by
3 posts views Thread by Boonaap | last post: by
1 post views Thread by choatdot | last post: by
By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and Terms of Use.