Comments

# Ben Kloosterman said on October 29, 2007 9:56 PM:

Not really usefull build a Message store service ages ago to store messages ( in memmory or storage via interface) .

Last time i stuffed around with an email server i took out half the companies email for a day . Rather not touch it  , filters virus scanners etc . Email storage is too complicated for the problem  its trying to solve .

I am trying to write a TCP/ UDP transoort though that is usefull.

Services for push anyone ?  Im not talking about mail which is marketed as push but is pull im talking sub second responses.

Regards,

Ben

# Martin Bohring said on October 30, 2007 4:50 AM:

Hello,

we intend to uses WCF on CE for implementing WS Services on embedded devices (.NET Microframework ist still not there, but we would rather do it on that plattform).

We will do real time alike services in a plug and play like fashion with service discoverability.

Therefore we don't see a scenario where the WCF mail transport is of any use for us.

I would like to see investments into WS Discovery, WS Security etc. on the .NET Compact Framework instead of implemeting parts of those myself.

Exspecially anoying is the fact that custom SOPA headers are not possible right now.

Hopefully this does not sound to harsh, but I miss the Servicemodel as well.

# Cesar Fong said on November 3, 2007 2:46 PM:

It looks really cool but why it can be delivered throug Exchange Server 2003 too?

# andarno said on November 21, 2007 11:56 PM:

Custom SOAP headers are supported by NetCF 3.5's WCF.  The only place they are not supported is by the NetCFSvcUtil tool, which doesn't support the mail transport anyway so it's a non-issue here.

# denny said on December 8, 2007 1:10 PM:

JUNK!

IMHO the WS-SOAP could do what the email method could do and the space and time could have been better used to provide a TCP-Binary WCF for .Net CF

which is way more usefull for many cases.

# Paolo Argentieri said on January 4, 2008 12:05 PM:

We are putting together a CF3.5 WCF device. This device will connect to an enterprise class .NET 3.5 system. The first WCF service that receives the CF3.5 device messages is using a transactional MSMQ for reliable store and forward messaging from that point on.

Thus, based on my experience I would have liked the following features to be available before the Mail transport:

-  WS-Security: Username/Password.

- TCP-Binary transport. Faster with reduced battery consumption.

IMHO the highest priorities for a battery powered networked device are:

- Easy to manage security (from a deployment and end-user point of view).

- Low battery consumption.

- Of course easy to develop for (powerful APIs).

Arguably the ROM size constrain is not that stringent anymore.

Keep up the nice BLOG entries.

# DrFooMod2 said on April 5, 2009 8:51 PM:

I don't really see how this has anything to do with WCF.  I don't see any mention of DataContract (i know it's not supported in CF) and ServiceContract/OperationContract.  This is simple stuffing XML into an email.  What's so special about that?

Leave a Comment

Name (required) 

Your URL (optional)

Comments (required) 

Remember Me?