Replacement for classic remoting IpcChannel ?

[curunoir]

Hello, first thanks for this project which can be very helpful.

I have to upgrade an old .net framework projecttowards .net core 6 which used .net remoting with Ipc channels, like this on client side

 ipcCh = new IpcChannel("someChannelName");
ChannelServices.RegisterChannel(ipcCh, true);

 obj = (ISharedAssemblyInterface)Activator.GetObject
     (typeof(.ISharedAssemblyInterface),
     ipc://LocalServer/RemoteCommunication");

As I looked into examples and documentation I don't think CoreRemoting is supporting interprocess without the use of a network layer such as tcp or http. It might be an issue for this application to listen on a dedicated port as it is widely distributed on various workstations where I don't have control and this dedicated port would already by taken.

But maybe there is something in CoreRemoting which might fit my use case and I didn't find it yet so I'm humbly asking here if you have some ideas or maybe some alternatives which will help me replace an alternative for classic remoting with Ipc channels.

Cheers.

[theRainbird]

Hello curunoir,

a IpcChannel for CoreRemoting is already on my todo list. However, it may take some time before I find time to implement this.

If you don't have the time to wait. You can also implement your own IpcChannel.
Just implement IServerChannel and IClientChannel interfaces. The original .NET Remoting IpcChannel uses Named Pipe protocol, which is also available in .NET Core / .NET 5+:
https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/dotnet/api/system.io.pipes.namedpipeserverstream?view=net-7.0
https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/dotnet/api/system.io.pipes.namedpipeclientstream?view=net-7.0

The following code project article can be used as inspiration how to send and receive byte-arrays via named pipe protocol: https://www.codeproject.com/Articles/864679/Creating-a-Server-Using-Named-Pipes.

Channels in CoreRemoting must only handle the raw message transport (sending and receiving byte-arrays).

Best regards,
Rainbird

[curunoir]

Hello theRainbird,

thanks for your answers. It's good to know that this feature was on your todolist already.

I had already found that Named pipes was one of the replacement candidate in Microsoft upgrade documentation so I will dig that way. In case I can implement this as a CoreRemoting channel easily maybe I will let you know what I have found though it is possible that using the most simplest implementation woud be the best for this application which is deployed at great scale.

Best regards,
curunoir

[theRainbird]

I have created a first draft of a named pipe based channel for CoreRemoting.

[sancheolz]

From previous experience, I can say that there will be a memory leak every time the connection is opened and closed. Because there is no deletion of entries from the dictionary at disconnect.

CoreRemoting/CoreRemoting.Channels.NamedPipe/NamedPipeServerChannel.cs

Lines 104 to 110 in bf7f3c8

	var connectionId = Guid.NewGuid().ToString();
	var connection = new SimpleNamedPipeConnection(connectionId, serverStream, _remotingServer);
	_connections.TryAdd(connectionId, connection);
	// Start handling this client
	_ = Task.Run(() => connection.HandleClientAsync());
	}

[theRainbird]

Thanks for the hint. 😅

Now the connections should be closed gracefully. I implemented the same pattern as in WebsocketServerChannel.

[yallie]

I have created a first draft of a named pipe based channel for CoreRemoting.

That's great! 👍

Looks like it doesn't have external dependencies.
Perhaps it can be added to the core library rather than a separate project?

[theRainbird]

Perhaps it can be added to the core library rather than a separate project?

Yes. Good idea. I'll add it to the core lib.

[theRainbird]

Named Pipe Channel is now part of the core lib. 😄
d39b309

[yallie]

Named Pipe Channel is now part of the core lib. 😄

Great! 🥳