Re: Problem - moving to IIS 6.0

• Previous message: BB: "Re: Digital I D"
• In reply to: David Wang [Msft]: "Re: Problem - moving to IIS 6.0"
• Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]

From: "Andy Doyle" <doyle_am@hotmail.com>
Date: Fri, 18 Apr 2003 03:00:56 -0700

David,

Thanks for the help.

I've just registered .Net Framework 1.0 with my IIS VD
and it's started working perfectly.

Cheers.

>-----Original Message-----
>I do not see anything wrong with what you are saying nor
what is happening
>(i.e. the behavior is by-design). I'll just offer you
some explanation of
>what is probably going on.
>
>First Q:
>As a part of Integrated authentication's handshake, you
will always see a
>401.2. This is because web browsers, by default, do not
know if a web
>server supports/requires authentication, so it always
sends a request using
>anonymous auth (i.e. no auth). Web Servers that require
authentication and
>disallow anonymous will reject that request with a 401.2
and tell the client
>what authentication method(s) it support(s).
Subsequently, it is up to the
>client to figure out how to optimize the requests to not
trigger unnecessary
>authentication attempts (but realize with any
optimization strategy that the
>server can always be mis-configured to foil any
optimization strategy of the
>client, so it really takes a little cooperation between
the client and
>server). In the case of Integrated authentication, IE
will be fine as long
>as the connection it uses is kept alive. IE does
remember if a site
>requires Integrated authentication, so subsequent
requests tend to go over
>the same connection and never trigger 401.2. I think IE
has trouble with
>pipelined requests (multiple different requests) over
the same connection
>and the web server uses authentication (of any sort) --
all those pipelined
>requests will be rejected with 401.2 initially, and then
everything is ok.
>Once again, this is a client-side optimization.
>
>Take Away -- You can only assume that authentication can
be automatically
>negotiated for you; it is irrational to assume that
authentication happens
>by premonition. If a browser doesn't know a website
requires
>authentication, it cannot pre-send any authentication
credentials since that
>is a security risk.
>
>Second Q:
>Windows Server 2003 comes with .Net Framework 1.1 by
default. You will need
>to install .Net Framework 1.0 and also instruct ASP.Net
to use 1.0 files
>instead of 1.1 files on a per-vdir basis (use
aspnet_regiis.exe inside of
>v1.0.3705 directory to do this to the vdir containing
your ASP.Net
>application -- look at the -s or -sn switch).
>
>I do not know if .Net, at run time, will run ASP.Net
with different versions
>of the Framework through dynamic determination or static
hints. It seems
>like something that should be configured (like what I
was noting with
>aspnet_regiis.exe) on the server for each application.
>
>--
>//David
>This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and
confers no rights.
>//
>"Andy Doyle" <doyle_am@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>news:06a901c3034f$a9b6b910$a401280a@phx.gbl...
>Hi,
>
>I've got an ASP.NET app that I've designed and tested on
>a Win2k box running .NET Framework 1.0. Everything was
>looking great so I decided to copy the app over to a
>Win2k3 box to make sure it worked there.
>
>Problem! Now when I navigate around the app files aren't
>always loaded or take a while to load. Looking at the
>IIS logs, I can see that there are sometimes 2 requests
>for the same file. The first one fails with a 401.2
>error but the next one loads okay - the only difference I
>can see is that the one that passes provided the username
>in the log string.
>
>My IIS folders are all set up with only Integrated
>Security enabled - so why is it trying to load a file
>without providing the login details?
>
>Well that's the first Q - but I have another. I'm also
>seeing a problem with my app trying to read the
>SmartNav.htm file from the asp_net\1.1........ folder;
>and it just sits there trying to access it. Can someone
>tell me if it is possible to force my app to use version
>1.0 of the framework when it runs rather than just using
>the latest? That way I could rule out v1.1 causing the
>problem.
>
>I would be very grateful if someone could help me out
>with this.
>
>Regards,
>
>Andy
>
>
>.
>

• Previous message: BB: "Re: Digital I D"
• In reply to: David Wang [Msft]: "Re: Problem - moving to IIS 6.0"
• Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]