WCF allows you to "expose" your code in any number of different ways.
So the HOST stuff doesn't need to run its code (and get what it needs) thru
IIS, as you suggest.
But it will expose its services via http/ssl if you so choose.
Check channel9 for the Greg Leake videos.
His stocktrader application will actually do it both ways.
1. The host exposes services, but doesn't actually consume services.
2. The host exposes services, but USES services as well. (Aka, a second
wcf layer).
You can look at the code at stocktrader.msdn.com ( I think thats it?)
But watch the videos BEFORE you open up the code.
...
You can see my additions to the WCF technology here:
http://sholliday.spaces.live.com/Blog/cns!A68482B9628A842A!158.entry
I have a downloadable example....and you can expose the service through
named pipes or a http web service.
"Bill Fuller" <so*****@nospam.comwrote in message
news:OG**************@TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl...
>I have a team that is designing/building an n-tier (5 logical layer, 3
physical) WinForms application that will be deployed via ClickOnce. The
backend will be using WCF for communication.
Here is the question... the design team is using IIS, which is not a
requirement of WCF. It is not a web application and we have total control
of the binding protocol (HTTP, TCP, ES, etc.). Thier reasoning for using
IIS is because of the requirement for SSL.
My thought is that the backend should be behind the firewall and
communicate to the client application via a proxy in the DMZ... with SSL
handling pushed to edge devices. This would mean that the WCF application
servers on the inside network would not have to be configured as web
servers.
Does anyone have any thoughts/recommendations/experience on this?
