I have a ASP.net 4.0 Web Site (not a Web Application). All the tutorials I have read discuss web applications. I was able to get it uploaded to Beanstalk through the VS 2013 AWS addin but it doesn't work (Elastic Load Balancer xxxx has zero healthy instances.). Is this because it's not a web application or is there something else I need to be looking in to?
Thanks!
Did you by chance forget to setup a healthcheck for ELB to use?
This blog post walks you thru it: http://blog.willbeattie.net/2010/09/load-balancing-with-amazon-ec2-and.html
Related
i tried to publish my ASP.NET web application to many ways such as FTP, Folder,and Azure
put it didn't work with me with url (www.mywebsite.com)
so i tried to host it online with GoDaddy and Hostinger also didn't work.
What is the best way to host my website with this URL?
For the best hosting experience with ASP.NET projects, I recommend Azure Cloud Hosting. In there you can define a new Web App Service and deploy your website directly from Visual Studio.
If you already have a domain you can transfer it to Azure.
I'm working for company which we have their own Virtual server for WordPress sites and It is running.
I don't know much about servers and hosts but I know that we run apache on server for WordPress sites and use cPanel for server management.
I create an application with ASP.NET Core 3.1 and Core is a cross-platform.
My question is ...
Can I run my application on this server without conflicting with other WordPress sites?
Thanks For Your Help!!
As long as you run your ASP.NET Core server on a port which is not used by another server, you should be fine.
Mahdi, Since you are using .NET Core you can host ASP.NET Core on Linux machines with Apache. For more details take a look at this article. To see how exactly to configure Apache reverse proxy take a look here.
Also bear in mind that you can run an entire WordPress Application over an ASP.NET Core Host seamlessly using PeachPie which is an open-source PHP language compiler and runtime for .NET and .NET Core frameworks. If you are interested in this take a look here.
I have developed a ASP.Net MVC 4 application with Visual Web Developer Express 2010. It was successfully published/deployed to a remote server A (development server) using the Web Developer's built-in publishing tool and it works perfectly on it IIS 7.0 with the web deployment component.
Now I want to deploy it to another remote server B (production server). This one sits in an isolated environment and does not have Internet access! Even if server B is a replica of server A, its IIS 7.0 does not have the web deployment tool component installed. So the built-in publishing tool does not work for the web deployment option.
I then tried to publish it using the File System option. I copied the exported files to a new folder on IIS on server B. The folder was configured the same way as its counterpart on server A. I tried the URL on server B and it just gave me directory/files listing on the browser instead of the welcome page of the application.
Has anybody got the experience or tips to solve the issue? Thanks.
Cheers,
Alex
edit:
because it a MVC site, the default document doesn't apply. check the following steps:
IIS Extension Less URLs are enabled and allowed.
ASP.NET 4.0 is installed and registered. C:\Windows\Microsoft.NET\Framework\<version> and then aspnet_regiis -i (this will typically force IIS to use the MVC infrastructure instead of using the default document methodology)
Ensure App Pool is in 4.0 Integrated mode.
Ensue that the IIS Advanced Settings for the website are showing the right root folder path.
I'm about to migrate several separate ASP.NET 4.0 Web Forms applications to Azure. Several are apps using SQL Server 2008. I'm seeing "conflicting" tutorials for this:
Deploying an ASP.NET Web Application to a Windows Azure Web Site and SQL Database
vs
Deploying an ASP.NET Web Application to a Windows Azure Cloud Service and SQL Database
This StackOverflow question goes some way towards explaining this. However, there have been several changes to Azure in recent months and I'm not sure how up to date the information is.
I want as simple a migration process as possible because of the number of sites I have to migrate. Is there a situation where I would have to use the Cloud Service route?
Aside from what the linked-to answer provides: You have to go the Cloud Service route if there are apps you need to install (e.g. an MSI, COM object, etc.). There's simply no facility to do this with Web Sites. In Web Sites, you cannot alter the VM instance at all. With Cloud Services, you have lots of flexibility to install software, alter IIS behavior, pretty much anything you need to do (as long as the installs can be automated).
One point which can be very valuable if you consider migration of ASP.NET 4.0 Web Forms applications - Microsoft Azure Websites do no support SSL for custom domains yet. That might be a blocker for your migration work to the Websites service.
Note that Windows Azure is very dynamic environment with great number of new features coming every new release. In order to be up-to-date I would suggest following ScottGu's Blog to find out about new features and their release dates.
EDIT
Windows Azure Website supports SSL for custom domains now. SSL Certificates and SSL bindings can be configured in Configure tab.
You can also read more about SSL configuration for Azure Website at Configuring an SSL certificate for a Windows Azure web site.
We have a desktop client application and recent customer requests indicate that they would like to have some dynamic HTML content served and displayed by the application.
We are considering hosting a simple ASP.NET application in a local process, accessible only from the local machine (similar to the ASP.NET development web server used when debugging from Visual Studio).
How can we run an ASP.NET application locally without IIS? IIS is not an option because most client machines will not have it installed.
Is there a leightweight ASP.NET web server that could run locally similar to the development web server that VS is using?
I have found some information about "Cassini". Is this suitable for production use? Can it handle ASP.NET MVC? Are there any alternatives we should consider?
I have not used it myself, but you can try the mono XPS server.
It is a stand alone webserver.
The easiest way to start XSP is to run it from within the root directory of your application. It will serve requests on port 8080. Place additional assemblies in the bin directory.
Cassini is in fact also a good option - it is the development web server that comes with visual studio (so widely distributed, used and tested) and is also used by the open source ScrewTurnWiki. See wikipedia.
In regards to your "only locally" requirement - a web server will serve any request made to the right port. In order to limit accessibility, you should use a firewall that will block any external requests.
You might consider using WCF to host a service on the local machine that can serve the data without having to host a full blown web server.
If you do this, WCF allows you to expose the service with multiple endpoints and make it available through HTTP, TCP, or Namepipes. Namepipes would restrict traffic to only the local machine.
I have also tried IIS Express. It works great with ASP.NET MVC. Right now it is available only with Web Matrix, but installing web matrix is easy.
Coming back to this question three years later, ServiceStack.NET with self-hosted option seems like a good choice. While it is not ASP.NET MVC directly, it provides a good API and features are on par with ASP.NET MVC/WebAPI (or in some ways better).