Sample Q&A 70-310: is it correct?

Q: The requirements that you have been given are that it needs to support
asynchronous methods and be able to be accessed by non-Windows clients.

Which type of .NET applicaton should you develop for the rewrite?

XML Web Service or .NET Remoting?


A: The correct answer is: ".NET Remoting."

In order for the application to be accessible by non-Windows clients then
..NET Remoting is the best choice from the options given.

http://msdn.microsoft.com/library/de...ngoverview.asp


I thought "non-Windows clients" was a dead giveaway for Web Service. Any
thoughts?

Thanks,
Greg

Greg Burns

For the 70-300 Architecture exam, the answer would be XML Web Service. I
would hope MS is consistent here.

"Greg Burns" <> wrote in message
news:#...
> Q: The requirements that you have been given are that it needs to support
> asynchronous methods and be able to be accessed by non-Windows clients.
>
> Which type of .NET applicaton should you develop for the rewrite?
>
> XML Web Service or .NET Remoting?
>
>
> A: The correct answer is: ".NET Remoting."
>
> In order for the application to be accessible by non-Windows clients then
> .NET Remoting is the best choice from the options given.
>
>
http://msdn.microsoft.com/library/de...us/cpguide/htm
l/cpconnetremotingoverview.asp
>
>
> I thought "non-Windows clients" was a dead giveaway for Web Service. Any
> thoughts?
>
> Thanks,
> Greg
>
>

General Protection Fault

>Q: The requirements that you have been given are that it
needs to support asynchronous methods and be able to be
accessed by non-Windows clients.
Which type of .NET applicaton should you develop for the
rewrite?
XML Web Service or .NET Remoting?
-----------------

The question does not rule out remoting; you need more
information to make the best choice. For example if you
need peer-to-peer conversations and stateful objects then
maybe remoting (using the SOAP formatter) would be
the 'best' answer after all.

http://msdn.microsoft.com/library/default.asp?
url=/library/en-us/dndotnet/html/dotnetremotearch.asp

http://www.ondotnet.com/pub/a/dotnet...07/webservices
..html

Maria

>-----Original Message-----
>For the 70-300 Architecture exam, the answer would be XML
Web Service. I
>would hope MS is consistent here.
>
>"Greg Burns" <> wrote in message
>news:#...
>> Q: The requirements that you have been given are that
it needs to support
>> asynchronous methods and be able to be accessed by non-
Windows clients.
>>
>> Which type of .NET applicaton should you develop for
the rewrite?
>>
>> XML Web Service or .NET Remoting?
>>
>>
>> A: The correct answer is: ".NET Remoting."
>>
>> In order for the application to be accessible by non-
Windows clients then
>> .NET Remoting is the best choice from the options given.
>>
>>
>http://msdn.microsoft.com/library/default.asp?
url=/library/en-us/cpguide/htm
>l/cpconnetremotingoverview.asp
>>
>>
>> I thought "non-Windows clients" was a dead giveaway for
Web Service. Any
>> thoughts?
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Greg
>>
>>
>
>
>.
>

Maria

>The question does not rule out remoting; you need more
>information to make the best choice.

The information was given, 'accessed by non-Windows clients', thus
ruling out remoting.

Kline Sphere

>The information was given, 'accessed by non-Windows
>clients', thus ruling out remoting.

I agree that you would normally only consider Remoting if
both endpoints are Windows. But I am not yet convinced
that a non-Windows client automatically rules out remoting.
Here is an example that suggests to me that a Java client
is possible - and yes I noticed that they use the Java
equivalent of a .NET object:

[JP Morgan deploye .NET remoting]
www.intrinsyc.com/pdfs/news/JPMttwFeb10.pdf

Going back to Greg Burns' question, yes I do accept that a
Web service would probably be the 'correct' answer.

Maria

>But I am not yet convinced
>that a non-Windows client automatically rules out remoting.
>Here is an example that suggests to me that a Java client
>is possible

I can't see microsoft 'promoting' Java, can you?

Kline Sphere

Maria, the article you pointed out
http://msdn.microsoft.com/library/de...remotearch.asp
stated this:
Interoperability
==========
A recurring Microsoft message is that if you need interoperability between
heterogeneous systems, then a Web services approach that uses open standards
(SOAP, XML, HTTP) is the right choice, and the use of .NET Remoting is never
an interop solution. For homogeneous systems where all participants are CLR
managed, .NET Remoting may be the right choice. This is a pretty broad
brush, but a useful distinction to make. Clients of .NET remoted objects
need to be .NET clients. If your functionality has to be addressable over
the Web (by Web, here I mean Internet) by loosely coupled SOAP clients (for
example, a Unix process), then Web services are the correct choice. The
intranet, of course, is not subject to the same limitations: All clients may
be .NET clients and in this configuration .NET Remoting is not precluded.
Similarly, for an environment where the middle (app) tier is behind a
firewall and communicates with the Web tier directly, .NET Remoting may
still be an option.

Now, there is the Linux version of .NET being developed, but Microsoft
doesn't want us to acknowledge that.

..NET remoting is MS's answer to the nastiness of DCOM. I believe it was
developed with intranets and security (port 80) in mind. I also believe that
web services were developed for interoperability in mind. I can write a
Windows/Linux/Unix/MF client application that will make a call to a web
service running on a Windows/Linux/Unix/MF server. EDI is too goofy to use
so we now use XML.

True, there are several articles on how to host it on IIS, but you still
must communicate with .NET remoting channels (TCP or HTTP). You need to .NET
libraries to use Remoting.

Just some thoughts.
Davin Mickelson

"Maria" <> wrote in message
news:0f0a01c37c6b$1ea09090$...
> >The information was given, 'accessed by non-Windows
> >clients', thus ruling out remoting.
>
> I agree that you would normally only consider Remoting if
> both endpoints are Windows. But I am not yet convinced
> that a non-Windows client automatically rules out remoting.
> Here is an example that suggests to me that a Java client
> is possible - and yes I noticed that they use the Java
> equivalent of a .NET object:
>
> [JP Morgan deploye .NET remoting]
> www.intrinsyc.com/pdfs/news/JPMttwFeb10.pdf
>
> Going back to Greg Burns' question, yes I do accept that a
> Web service would probably be the 'correct' answer.
>

Davin Mickelson

If anyone is interested, that question was from the PrepLogic exam that came
with the ExamCram2 book for 70-310.

The book is very good (I haven't really noticed any errors). The included
PrepLogic disc contains 60 questions (not the same Qs as in the text). I
swear I had an issue with EVERY SINGLE ONE!

Taking the test tomorrow. Maybe by then I can forget everything their
"prep" software taught me. ;^)

Greg


"Kline Sphere" <T> wrote in message
news:...
> >But I am not yet convinced
> >that a non-Windows client automatically rules out remoting.
> >Here is an example that suggests to me that a Java client
> >is possible
>
> I can't see microsoft 'promoting' Java, can you?

Greg Burns

[waving a white flag] - You are right...
I had read the article, but was trying to make the point
that cross-platform functionality is not ruled out in
principle.
It *is* ruled out in practice and of course it is a no-no
on the exams.

>Going back to Greg Burns' question, yes I do accept
>that a Web service would probably be the 'correct'
>answer.

Did you notice I had already capitulated ;o) ?

Maria

Maria

Whoops...

BTW - Cool word!
I had to look that one m-w.com

Always increasing the vocabulary...
Davin

"Maria" <> wrote in message
news:0cc401c37c96$3c722cc0$...
> [waving a white flag] - You are right...
> I had read the article, but was trying to make the point
> that cross-platform functionality is not ruled out in
> principle.
> It *is* ruled out in practice and of course it is a no-no
> on the exams.
>
> >Going back to Greg Burns' question, yes I do accept
> >that a Web service would probably be the 'correct'
> >answer.
>
> Did you notice I had already capitulated ;o) ?
>
> Maria
>

Davin Mickelson