[Mono-dev] System.NotImplementedException: The requested feature is not implemented. at System.ServiceModel.Configuration.WSHttpBindingElement.OnApplyConfiguration
Greg Robinson
gregarobinson at gmail.com
Tue May 25 09:27:36 EDT 2010
I changed the config file settings to basicHttpBinding, removed all of the
related WSHttpBinding values and ran under Mono 2.6+.
Now I receive this exception
System.NotImplementedException: The requested feature is not implemented.
at
System.ServiceModel.Configuration.ClientCredentialsElement.CreateBehavior ()
[0x00000] in <filename unknown>:0
On Mon, May 24, 2010 at 2:25 PM, Atsushi Eno <
atsushieno at veritas-vos-liberabit.com> wrote:
> It should in general work (we use its client side in moonlight too),
> depends on which parts of the features you use.
>
> Atsushi Eno
>
>
> On 2010/05/24 23:09, Greg Robinson wrote:
>
>> What about BasicHttpBinding?
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> On Mon, May 24, 2010 at 10:00 AM, Atsushi Eno <
>> atsushieno at veritas-vos-liberabit.com <mailto:
>> atsushieno at veritas-vos-liberabit.com>> wrote:
>>
>> WSHttpBinding is not usable at all. It involves the huge WS-*
>> stack like WS-Security which is far from done.
>>
>> Atsushi Eno
>>
>>
>> On 2010/05/24 21:42, Greg Robinson wrote:
>>
>> I have been making good progress on moving our .NET server
>> application over to Mono 2.2 running on Ubuntu 2.2.
>>
>> Friday, I ported the WCF pieces over where all the server
>> application does is make calls to a WCF service running on a
>> windows server outside of our office.
>>
>> I am getting the following, which suggests to me these pieces
>> of "client side" WCF are not implemented in Mono 2.2:
>>
>> System.NotImplementedException: The requested feature is not
>> implemented.
>> at
>>
>> System.ServiceModel.Configuration.WSHttpBindingElement.OnApplyConfiguration
>> (System.ServiceModel.Channels.Binding binding) [0x00000]
>> at
>>
>> System.ServiceModel.Configuration.StandardBindingElement.ApplyConfiguration
>> (System.ServiceModel.Channels.Binding binding) [0x00000]
>> at System.ServiceModel.Configuration.ConfigUtil.CreateBinding
>> (System.String binding, System.String bindingConfiguration)
>> [0x00000]
>> at System.ServiceModel.ChannelFactory.ApplyConfiguration
>> (System.String endpointConfig) [0x00000]
>> at System.ServiceModel.ChannelFactory.InitializeEndpoint
>> (System.String endpointConfigurationName,
>> System.ServiceModel.EndpointAddress remoteAddress) [0x00000]
>> at
>>
>> System.ServiceModel.ChannelFactory`1[OurCompanyName.Common.WebServiceReference.OurCompanyNameWCFServiceProxy.IOurCompanyNameService]..ctor
>> (System.String endpointConfigurationName,
>> System.ServiceModel.EndpointAddress remoteAddress) [0x00000]
>> at System.ServiceModel.ClientBase`1[TChannel].Initialize
>> (System.ServiceModel.InstanceContext instance, System.String
>> configName, System.ServiceModel.EndpointAddress remoteAddress)
>> [0x00000]
>> at System.ServiceModel.ClientBase`1[TChannel]..ctor
>> (System.ServiceModel.InstanceContext instance, System.String
>> configname) [0x00000]
>> at System.ServiceModel.ClientBase`1[TChannel]..ctor
>> (System.ServiceModel.InstanceContext instance) [0x00000]
>> at System.ServiceModel.ClientBase`1[TChannel]..ctor () [0x00000]
>> at
>>
>> OurCompanyName.Common.WebServiceReference.OurCompanyNameWCFServiceProxy.OurCompanyNameServiceClient..ctor
>> () [0x00000]
>> at
>>
>> OurCompanyName.Common.WebServiceReference.OurCompanyNameServiceProxyAgent.CreateServiceProxy
>> (Boolean useLimited) [0x00000]
>> at
>>
>> OurCompanyName.Common.WebServiceReference.OurCompanyNameServiceProxyAgent.CreateServiceProxy
>> () [0x00000]
>> at
>>
>> OurCompanyName.Common.WebServiceReference.OurCompanyNameServiceProxyAgent.GetConfiguration
>> (System.String loggerSAN) [0x00000]
>> at
>>
>> OurCompanyName.Common.WebServiceReference.OurCompanyNameServiceProxyAgent.GetConfiguration
>> () [0x00000]
>> at OurCompanyNameWCFClientTest.Program.Main (System.String[]
>> args) [0x00000]
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> Any idea if\when this will be implemented? is there a workaround?
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> Thanks
>>
>>
>>
>> -- Greg
>>
>> My Blog: http://dotnetrocks.blogspot.com/
>> My Techy Blog: http://weblogs.asp.net/grobinson/
>> Amy's Blog: http://amyshome.blogspot.com/
>> LinkedIn: http://www.linkedin.com/in/gregarobinson
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Mono-devel-list mailing list
>> Mono-devel-list at lists.ximian.com
>> <mailto:Mono-devel-list at lists.ximian.com>
>>
>> http://lists.ximian.com/mailman/listinfo/mono-devel-list
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Greg
>>
>> My Blog: http://dotnetrocks.blogspot.com/
>> My Techy Blog: http://weblogs.asp.net/grobinson/
>> Amy's Blog: http://amyshome.blogspot.com/
>> LinkedIn: http://www.linkedin.com/in/gregarobinson
>> My Company:
>> http://www.richmondbizsense.com/2010/05/04/health-monitoring-company-is-well-aware-of-richmond%E2%80%99s-benefits/
>>
>
>
>
--
Greg
My Blog: http://dotnetrocks.blogspot.com/
My Techy Blog: http://weblogs.asp.net/grobinson/
Amy's Blog: http://amyshome.blogspot.com/
LinkedIn: http://www.linkedin.com/in/gregarobinson
My Company:
http://www.richmondbizsense.com/2010/05/04/health-monitoring-company-is-well-aware-of-richmond%E2%80%99s-benefits/
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.ximian.com/pipermail/mono-devel-list/attachments/20100525/47cad5cf/attachment.html
More information about the Mono-devel-list
mailing list