Re: AzMan Still the way to go?

A couple of downsides about AzMan. It uses com interop so I think your
site will required full trust. It is AD based and AD in not immediate
like sql depending on the topology and replication. And because of
those, it is finicky, Be prepared for lots of "the parameter is
incorrect", "system.io not found", and other odd exceptions that are
propagated very poorly from the interop layer or wherever. And be
prepared to point at a single AD server and not the domain if you
expect your roles to be visible instantly (same goes for AD membership
users). Just my $0.02.

.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Code Access Security
    ... I notice that you stated that you assigned the "Everything" permission set. ... Note that this is *not* the same as "Full Trust". ... > at the exception trace and see what is generating the SecurityException ... The interop layer is contained in mscorlib ...
    (microsoft.public.dotnet.framework)
  • Re: Problems with AzMan interop and CLR 2
    ... well - also in 1.x AzMan needs fulltrust - COM interop always requires full trust. ... subsequently the 2.0 GAC now grants full trust to any assembly that is ...
    (microsoft.public.dotnet.security)
  • Re: Web Part and COM Interop
    ... "Eric Johnson" wrote in message ... > the Interop assembly. ... Nor did using the .NET Framework Wizard to fully ... Any .NET managed assembly needs full trust to use COM interop. ...
    (microsoft.public.sharepoint.windowsservices)
  • Re: ComInterop
    ... I would say that some of the main downsides of COM Interop is the overhead of marshalling your parameters to the COM component. ...
    (microsoft.public.dotnet.general)