Decompiled

I have some new additions and apps that I wanted to integrate into our company web (the company I work for) but this required upgrading from ASP.Net 1.1 to ASP.Net 2.0. Seems simple enough, right? I wish..!!

The site uses the MySql .NET Connector (a native ADO connector for .Net) available from MySQL AB. This worked flawlessly under the .Net 1.1 framework. I set up the 2.0 framework on our dev server and started testing the site localy to make sure all existing features and functions would still work after the switch. I am happy to announce that everything was working as expected (on the dev server). Now it was time to request the upgrade through the host. After receiving the confirmation that the request was completed, I open a browser and hit the company web. Warning Warning Error Error Error. Oh no!! What happened?

With the release of .NET 2.0, Microsoft included a new security model using a greater level of restriction. The host that is hosting our web makes use of these restriction levels and as it turns out, the .Net connector that we were using violated some .Net security and triggered a Security Exception.

Exception Details: System.Security.SecurityException: That assembly does not allow partially trusted callers.

I have to give Props to Microsoft for making the problem easy to identify. Looks like all I need to do is allow partially trusted calls from the MySql connector.

Here is where the Beauty of Open Source Software comes in.
(more…)

I recently tried to run some .Net 2.0 code on my testing web server (IIS 5). Now, my server has .Net Frameworks 1.1 and 2.0 installed, but when I tried to run some 2.0 code, I got a series of errors on the page with a small line at the bottom that said the page was executing under the .net 1.1 Framework.

I thought to myself, If the 2.0 Framework is installed, why won’t it just use that. So I open up the Internet Services Manager for IIS to see if there was anything there that could help me figure this little issue out. Well, as it turns out, you need to specify what framework a web uses to execute it’s code from within the IIS Manager console. These settings are found by right clicking on the target web site in the Manager console and selecting “properties”.

Now in the properties panel, select the ASP.Net tab. In this tab view you should see a form page containing a few fields and a couple buttons. The first field at the top of the form is labeled “ASP.Net Version” and has a drop down menu containing the available installed framework versions. Select the appropriate version you want to use to process asp.net pages for the web your working in and hit the “Apply” or “OK” button. That’s all there is to it! You can also specify different Frameworks for different webs that are hosted on the same server. One of the good things about the .Net Frameworks is that they install and run independently of each other.

ComputerWorld has a good article of what they consider the 8 most dangerous consumer technologies.

This is a topic I revisit often and a lot of good points are brought up in this article.

Scott Lowe has a good article here describing some of the obsticles he ran into while installing Microsoft Exchange 2007

This will be helpful if I decide to stick with Exchange and upgrade to the 2007 release.

By now you may have heard of Google’s new initiative known as “Android”. Android is Google’s new project set to bring an open source mobile platform based on the Linux OS to the cell phone market. So what does this mean for the cell phone and mobile markets? Google has created an alliance called the “Open Handset Alliance” including a selection of 34 market leading hardware, software and telecom companies.

Andy Rubin, Google’s director of mobile platforms, and Android project leader said the open-source strategy would encourage rapid innovation and lower the bar to entry in the highly competitive cellphone market, where software accounts for an increasing share of the cost of making a phone.

I believe most of the excitement surrounds the fact that this is, in some fashion, an “open” project which means more support from more providers, manufacturers, developers, and applications with lower costs. However, it is still unclear how “open” it will be and it is still possible that handset makers and operators will “lock” their own release and limit use to their own services or applications. Either way, this is in sharp contrast to Apple’s iPhone which is completely shut down, locked out and restricted to anyone outside Apple.

One thing to note is that there will not be an actual Google device (”gPhone”). Instead, the platform will be freely available to developers and manufacturers who will create the mobile devices to use the Android software.

Andy Rubin together with other members of the crew talk about the so-called Gphone.

It will be very interesting to see how this plays out over the coming months and year(s).

A Quick Rant:

It is time to start planning for server upgrades at the company I work for. At the center of our network, we have an exchange 2000 server loaded with public folders. Public folders are crucial to our daily work and are used to organize all current publicity tours.

Unfortunately, Microsoft has planned to discontinue support of public folders after the Exchange 2007 release. From what I understand, they are available in the new release (2007), but not by default and will not be available in future releases. The system requirements also up the ante for an exchange upgrade, and our current hardware will need to be upgraded as well…which brings me to my dilemma.

I am leaning toward a recommendation for upgrading to Exchange 2007 and migrating to new server hardware required as well, …OR… do I consider the alternatives?

1) I have done some research on Exchange replacements and it seems that Scalix or Zimbra are as close as they come and they actually look pretty impressive. These run on linux based platforms and would run on existing hardware with public folder support. But this doesn’t come without it’s potential pitfalls.

The transition from Windows 2000 - Active Directory - Exchange combo to a Linux - LDAP - Scalix/Zimbra is not exactly an easy way out.

How does LDAP compare to AD for use with user/group authentication?
Can user and group accounts be transfered from AD to LDAP and maintain network permissions?
Can users be managed in the same way using LDAP as they are in AD?
Can I use Scalix/Zimbra with AD and forget the idea of needing LDAP? (after all, AD is pretty much just a modified LDAP).

2) Do I recommend the Exchange upgrade and try to find public folder replacement or develop a custom in-house replacement.

I like the idea of breaking the windows licensing trap and the potential savings, but at the same time, I am cautious about the support available with the alternatives, not to mention changes required make such a transition. I tend to think that the the second option is likely the easiest and more hassle-free of the two, however, I have yet to come across anything that works like public folders in a stand alone application.