I hate IIS - "Server Application Unavailable" error message
Kevin Liebowicz
Yes, this is on a Win2003 Server.
Yes, this machine is a domain controller.
Yes, I seen the dozens of KB articles like this one:
http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?scid=kb;en-us;Q315158
But the problem is that 99% of these are for ASP .NET 1.x and this
is .NET 2.x which I just installed to try and get .net working for the
first time ever. I've see all the HACKS to get .net 1.x working... but
this is for .net 2.x so these worthless KB articles do nothing for me.
Example -
http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?scid=kb;en-us;Q315158
RESOLUTION
To work around this problem, use one of the following methods: ·
Create a weak account that has the correct permissions, and then
configure the <processModel> section of the Machine.config file to use
that account.
· Set the userName attribute to SYSTEM in the <processModel> section
of the Machine.config file.
· Configure the <processModel> section of the Machine.config file to
use an administrator account.
THIS IS USELESS !!!!! There is no "userName" attribute in the
Machine.config file in .net 2.x. And if this is a known problem then
why doesn't the installer warn me or fix it automatically. Sorry, but
your software sucks lately.!!!!!!!
The event log is filled with messages like:
<quote>
aspnet_wp.exe could not be started. The error code for the failure is
800700CB. This error can be caused when the worker process account has
insufficient rights to read the .NET Framework files. Please ensure
that the .NET Framework is correctly installed and that the ACLs on
the installation directory allow access to the configured account.
</quote>
Sorry Microsoft - But you are getting WORSE and WORSE. How about
software that simply works????
It's no wonder that Linux is kicking your butt and I'm about 30
seconds away from saying goodbye to your over-complicated bug ridden
crap and making the transition to linux myself.
Otavio Decio
site properties and made sure it is set to the right version? Did you go to
the Web Service Extensions and made sure the proper extensions are enabled?
If nothing else works, try re-registering 2.0 for asp.net
(aspnet_regiis.exe)
Calm down, 2.0 is way better than 1.1 and it is worth the trouble.
Otavio
"Kevin Liebowicz" <linu...@lycos.com> wrote in message
news:1183424160....@w5g2000hsg.googlegroups.com...
Kevin Liebowicz
> Framework versions mixup maybe?
Or maybe Microsoft needs to get their house in order.
> Did you check the ASP.NET tab page on the site
> properties and made sure it is set to the right version?
Version 2.0.50727
> Did you go to the Web Service Extensions and
> made sure the proper extensions are enabled?
I have no idea where this is. Default doc types include .asp (which
works great) and .aspx. This is my first time every trying to get a
simple HelloWorld.aspx page to load and the experience simply SUCKS.
Sorry, but there's no other way to describe this fiasco.
> If nothing else works, try re-registering 2.0 for asp.net
> (aspnet_regiis.exe)
Been there, done that. Found this and a bunch of other "re-register"
tips all over the web. None work.
> Calm down, 2.0 is way better than 1.1 and it is worth the trouble.
I'm starting to have my doubts about this. Microsoft can't be bothered
to write software that works (ex: this and Vista) so I'm really
starting to think that I need to look at FREE alternatives.
I paid good money for Server 2003 and it ought to at least work as
advertised.
>
> Otavio
>
> "Kevin Liebowicz" <linux-...@lycos.com> wrote in message
>
> news:1183424160....@w5g2000hsg.googlegroups.com...
> Yes, I wasted the past two days trying to fix this.
> Yes, this is on a Win2003 Server.
> Yes, this machine is a domain controller.
>
> Yes, I seen the dozens of KB articles like this one:http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?scid=kb;en-us;Q315158
>
> But the problem is that 99% of these are for ASP .NET 1.x and this
> is .NET 2.x which I just installed to try and get .net working for the
> first time ever. I've see all the HACKS to get .net 1.x working... but
> this is for .net 2.x so these worthless KB articles do nothing for me.
>
> Example -http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?scid=kb;en-us;Q315158
Otavio Decio
> made sure the proper extensions are enabled?
I have no idea where this is.
It can be accessed in IIS Manager at the same level as Web Sites and
Application Pools. One of the items is ASP.NET v2.0.50727, must be set to
"Allowed". I believe they are locked down by default.
One thing I would do is launch Filemon and observe if there are files that
can't be found or opened.
If you are looking for free alternatives, JBoss or Tomcat are good places to
start. Java is not a bad environment, really. But believe me, I developed
quite a bit of web apps and have few complaints about Server 2003.
Otavio
"Kevin Liebowicz" <linu...@lycos.com> wrote in message
news:1183425903.8...@m36g2000hse.googlegroups.com...
Juan T. Llibre
!> Yes, this is on a Win2003 Server.
!> Yes, this machine is a domain controller.
Bad idea.
In general, it's not advisable to run your Web server on a domain controller,
because a compromise of the machine is a compromise of the domain.
But, if you *really* need to do that...
re:
!> There is no "userName" attribute in the Machine.config file in .net 2.x.
Yes, there is.
<processModel enable="true" userName="SYSTEM" password="AutoGenerate" />
...ought to cover it for you, if you *really* want to run ASP.NET
as the SYSTEM account on a domain controller, although I would encrypt the section.
Even better, I would NOT run ASP.NET as the System account. See below...
re:
!> The event log is filled with messages like:
It's no wonder that is happening.
re:
!> How about software that simply works????
If you deliberately run ASP.NET on a domain controller,
something which is not recommended, don't blame Microsoft
if you can't RTFM to implement the workaround.
http://msdn2.microsoft.com/en-us/library/7w2sway1.aspx
Even better than using the System account would be specifing an explicit account.
That works around the security problems which
running ASP.NET on a domain controller exposes you to.
To do that, follow the instructions in this article...
How To: Create a Service Account for an ASP.NET 2.0 Application:
http://msdn2.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms998297.aspx
Try it. It's really easy to do.
Juan T. Llibre, asp.net MVP
asp.net faq : http://asp.net.do/faq/
foros de asp.net, en español : http://asp.net.do/foros/
======================================
"Kevin Liebowicz" <linu...@lycos.com> wrote in message news:1183424160....@w5g2000hsg.googlegroups.com...
Cowboy (Gregory A. Beamer)
--
Gregory A. Beamer
MVP; MCP: +I, SE, SD, DBA
http://gregorybeamer.spaces.live.com
Co-author: Microsoft Expression Web Bible (upcoming)
************************************************
Think outside the box!
************************************************
"Juan T. Llibre" <nomail...@nowhere.com> wrote in message
news:ej4GZaRv...@TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl...
Cowboy (Gregory A. Beamer)
Juan told you not to do this.
You can get it running on a domain controller by altering this account. The
problem is you now leave a big hole into your domain controller.
Why is this a problem? Well, once someone has control of your domain
controller, they have control of your domain.
And, why is that dangerous? Do you hold ANY secrets. You know, things like
customer's credit cards, you own employee's social security numbers?
Anything like that? Well, you have the potential of leaving it all open for
someone.
Can this really happen? Well, the likelihood is fairly low. It is almost
impossible on a NORMAL web server, but it is a bit more of a risk on web
server that happens to sit on a DC.
Can you mitigate this. Certainly. Buy a web server.
Here is the bottom line. Is it less risky to tell the person forcing you to
do this to buy a web server or to have your customer's data stolen (and
perhaps your own) or to risk you job telling your boss he needs to spend a
few thousand on a web server? If the later, then find a better job. And, if
it is you that is the boss deciding you need to risk your whole business
over a couple of thosand dollars, then I am wating my time.
Don't put your web server on a DC ... EVER.
Nuff said. If you ignore this, you can take Juan's "fix" and hang yourself.
--
Gregory A. Beamer
MVP; MCP: +I, SE, SD, DBA
http://gregorybeamer.spaces.live.com
Co-author: Microsoft Expression Web Bible (upcoming)
************************************************
Think outside the box!
************************************************
"Kevin Liebowicz" <linu...@lycos.com> wrote in message
news:1183424160....@w5g2000hsg.googlegroups.com...
Juan T. Llibre
!> Ouch Juan. I am praying for this guy's funeral. :-)
heh...
The problem is that some people like going to funerals
so much that they are willing to die so they get to go to one.
;-)
What gets me most, though, is the tendency to blame Microsoft, instead of taking advantage
of the immense technical knowledge of the regulars who come here quite willing to help anybody
who asks nicely, at the cheapest price possible : free.
There's all kinds of specialists who frequent here.
You are one of the best architecture guys there is; I'm more of a setup, optimization and troubleshooting
specialist; there's programming whizzes like Bruce Barker, Kevin Spencer and Mark Rae here, and
creative application specialists like Peter Bromberg, and that's just the tip of the iceberg.
There's many more whom it would be exhausting to mention
...and our collective knowledge can be had just for the asking.
Why someone would rant against Microsoft when just asking nicely,
right here, would get him on the road to solving his problems is beyond me.
Juan T. Llibre, asp.net MVP
asp.net faq : http://asp.net.do/faq/
foros de asp.net, en español : http://asp.net.do/foros/
======================================
"Cowboy (Gregory A. Beamer)" <NoSpamM...@comcast.netNoSpamM> wrote in message
news:%23HHGvnR...@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...
> Ouch Juan. I am praying for this guy's funeral. :-)
> Gregory A. Beamer
> MVP; MCP: +I, SE, SD, DBA
> http://gregorybeamer.spaces.live.com
> Co-author: Microsoft Expression Web Bible (upcoming)
> "Juan T. Llibre" <nomail...@nowhere.com> wrote in message news:ej4GZaRv...@TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl...
>> re:
>> !> Yes, this is on a Win2003 Server.
>> !> Yes, this machine is a domain controller.
>>
>> Bad idea.
>>
>> In general, it's not advisable to run your Web server on a domain controller, because a compromise of the machine is
>> a compromise of the domain.
>>
>> But, if you *really* need to do that...
>>
>> re:
>> !> There is no "userName" attribute in the Machine.config file in .net 2.x.
>>
>> Yes, there is.
>>
>> <processModel enable="true" userName="SYSTEM" password="AutoGenerate" />
>>
>> ...ought to cover it for you, if you *really* want to run ASP.NET
>> as the SYSTEM account on a domain controller, although I would encrypt the section.
>>
>> Even better, I would NOT run ASP.NET as the System account. See below...
>>
>> re:
>> !> The event log is filled with messages like:
>>
>> It's no wonder that is happening.
>>
>> re:
>> !> How about software that simply works????
>>
>> If you deliberately run ASP.NET on a domain controller,
>> something which is not recommended, don't blame Microsoft
>> if you can't RTFM to implement the workaround.
>>
>> http://msdn2.microsoft.com/en-us/library/7w2sway1.aspx
>>
>> Even better than using the System account would be specifying an explicit account.
Kevin Liebowicz
<NoSpamMgbwo...@comcast.netNoSpamM> wrote:
> Juan has given you the hangman's noose. Now I am going to inform you why
> Juan told you not to do this.
>
> You can get it running on a domain controller by altering this account. The
> problem is you now leave a big hole into your domain controller.
>
> Why is this a problem? Well, once someone has control of your domain
> controller, they have control of your domain.
>
> And, why is that dangerous? Do you hold ANY secrets. You know, things like
> customer's credit cards, you own employee's social security numbers?
> Anything like that? Well, you have the potential of leaving it all open for
> someone.
Not at all. This domain controller is in the basement of my house
where it sits behind a firewall. There is no external access to the
network and the domain controller simply provides me with centralized
management for my computers and those that my kids use. I run a web
server on the same machine to serve mp3s, photos and videos.
> Can this really happen? Well, the likelihood is fairly low. It is almost
> impossible on a NORMAL web server, but it is a bit more of a risk on web
> server that happens to sit on a DC.
Not a problem for me unless my wife plans on hacking into the server.
Don't think that you and/or Microsoft understand every customer
scenario because you don't.
> Can you mitigate this. Certainly. Buy a web server.
I don't need yet another machine. The one I currently have is more
than capable.
> Here is the bottom line. Is it less risky to tell the person forcing you to
> do this to buy a web server or to have your customer's data stolen (and
> perhaps your own) or to risk you job telling your boss
There is no customer data. I don't need another computer. And there is
no boss.
> he needs to spend a
> few thousand on a web server? If the later, then find a better job. And, if
> it is you that is the boss deciding you need to risk your whole business
> over a couple of thosand dollars, then I am wating my time.
Yeah, yeah, yeah. Once again... one size does NOT fit all.
> Don't put your web server on a DC ... EVER.
EVER? Then do explain why my family intranet needs a 2nd machine to
server web pages.
> Nuff said. If you ignore this, you can take Juan's "fix" and hang yourself.
Ignored because you believe that you understand my situation better
than I do. You do not.
> --
> Gregory A. Beamer
> MVP; MCP: +I, SE, SD, DBAhttp://gregorybeamer.spaces.live.com
> Co-author: Microsoft Expression Web Bible (upcoming)
>
> ************************************************
> Think outside the box!
> ************************************************"Kevin Liebowicz" <linux-...@lycos.com> wrote in message
>
> news:1183424160....@w5g2000hsg.googlegroups.com...
> Yes, I wasted the past two days trying to fix this.
> Yes, this is on a Win2003 Server.
> Yes, this machine is a domain controller.
>
> Yes, I seen the dozens of KB articles like this one:http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?scid=kb;en-us;Q315158
>
> But the problem is that 99% of these are for ASP .NET 1.x and this
> is .NET 2.x which I just installed to try and get .net working for the
> first time ever. I've see all the HACKS to get .net 1.x working... but
> this is for .net 2.x so these worthless KB articles do nothing for me.
>
> Example -http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?scid=kb;en-us;Q315158
Juan T. Llibre
in your case all you have to do is set up an ad-hoc service account,
as indicated in the link I sent you :
How To: Create a Service Account for an ASP.NET 2.0 Application:
http://msdn2.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms998297.aspx
You really shouldn't run ASP.NET as the System account,
just in case something goes wrong with the boxes' security
Juan T. Llibre, asp.net MVP
asp.net faq : http://asp.net.do/faq/
foros de asp.net, en español : http://asp.net.do/foros/
======================================
"Kevin Liebowicz" <linu...@lycos.com> wrote in message news:1183470636.9...@k79g2000hse.googlegroups.com...
Kevin Liebowicz
wrote:
> re:
> !> Yes, this is on a Win2003 Server.
> !> Yes, this machine is a domain controller.
First of all thank you for the help. And I do mean it.
> Bad idea.
Let me be the judge of that.
> In general, it's not advisable to run your Web server on a domain controller,
> because a compromise of the machine is a compromise of the domain.
Funny because when I first installed Win2003 server it had no
problems, complaints or warnings installing IIS for me. I've been
using IIS to serve web-pages for several years now without a single
problem. It seems that things only "half-work" because .ASP pages get
served but I need to screw around and tweak the daylights out of the
machine to get the other half (.ASPX) pages working.
> But, if you *really* need to do that...
I *really* do need to do that.
> re:
> !> There is no "userName" attribute in the Machine.config file in .net 2.x.
>
> Yes, there is.
>
> <processModel enable="true" userName="SYSTEM" password="AutoGenerate" />
Not on my machine there isn't.
bubba:CONFIG>pwd
/cygdrive/c/WINNT/Microsoft.NET/Framework/v2.0.50727/CONFIG
bubba:CONFIG>grep -i username machine.config
bubba:CONFIG>
C:\WINNT\Microsoft.NET\Framework\v2.0.50727\CONFIG\machine.config
<system.web>
<processModel autoConfig="true"/>
<httpHandlers />
<membership>
<providers>
*** snip ***
</providers>
</membership>
> ...ought to cover it for you, if you *really* want to run ASP.NET
> as the SYSTEM account on a domain controller, although I would encrypt the section.
I just want the damn thing to work. IIS is able to run and server ASP
pages for several years now. Why is it that ASPX is completely borked?
And NO... this is not some "feature" where Microsoft is protecting me
from myself. It's simply hosed.
> Even better, I would NOT run ASP.NET as the System account. See below...
I believe that IIS normally serves ASP pages under an account named
IUSR_<machine-name> - Why can't ASPX pages run under the same account?
Nah... that would be too easy.
> re:
> !> The event log is filled with messages like:
>
> It's no wonder that is happening.
>
> re:
> !> How about software that simply works????
>
> If you deliberately run ASP.NET on a domain controller,
> something which is not recommended, don't blame Microsoft
> if you can't RTFM to implement the workaround.
What do you mean RTFM??? There is NO "Manual" to read, no USEFUL error
messages. Searching the web proves this problem has been around
since .net 1.0 and it still doesn't work right.
> http://msdn2.microsoft.com/en-us/library/7w2sway1.aspx
Excellent. (And thanks). What's the magic search words that one must
use in order to search and find this link.
> Even better than using the System account would be specifing an explicit account.
>
> That works around the security problems which
> running ASP.NET on a domain controller exposes you to.
>
> To do that, follow the instructions in this article...
>
> How To: Create a Service Account for an ASP.NET 2.0 Application:http://msdn2.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms998297.aspx
>
> Try it. It's really easy to do.
I'm sure it is... once the server finishes printing all 6 pages of
these "easy" instructions.
> Juan T. Llibre, asp.net MVP
> asp.net faq :http://asp.net.do/faq/
> foros de asp.net, en español :http://asp.net.do/foros/
> ======================================"Kevin Liebowicz" <linux-...@lycos.com> wrote in messagenews:1183424160....@w5g2000hsg.googlegroups.com...
>
> Yes, I wasted the past two days trying to fix this.
> Yes, this is on a Win2003 Server.
> Yes, this machine is a domain controller.
>
> Yes, I seen the dozens of KB articles like this one:http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?scid=kb;en-us;Q315158
>
> But the problem is that 99% of these are for ASP .NET 1.x and this
> is .NET 2.x which I just installed to try and get .net working for the
> first time ever. I've see all the HACKS to get .net 1.x working... but
> this is for .net 2.x so these worthless KB articles do nothing for me.
>
> Example -http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?scid=kb;en-us;Q315158
Kevin Liebowicz
> Kevin,
>
> in your case all you have to do is set up an ad-hoc service account,
> as indicated in the link I sent you :
>
> How To: Create a Service Account for an ASP.NET 2.0 Application:http://msdn2.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms998297.aspx
Except that it still does not work.
I followed the directions -
#1 - I created a new account (in the User group) named
aspxuseraccount.
[Works]
#2 - Assign ASP.NET permissions to the new account
(FAMILY is the domain name since it's the home/family domain
controller)
C:\WINNT\Microsoft.NET\Framework\v2.0.50727>aspnet_regiis.exe -ga
FAMILY\aspxuseraccount
Start granting FAMILY\aspxuseraccount access to the IIS metabase and
other directories used by ASP.NET.
Finished granting FAMILY\aspxuseraccount access to the IIS metabase
and other directories used by ASP.NET.
[Works]
#3 - Create a Test ASP.NET Application
WRONG! This is a server that sits in the basement. I don't have visual
studio .net installed on this machine nor do I intend on buying it
just to "enable" my machine to serve a simple .aspx page.
So I create a small file named Default.aspx and I paste the text from
the article into it. Without VS.net I can't compile or run the app but
I ought to at least be able to serve this page. Nope... still can't do
that:
<quote>
Server Application Unavailable
The web application you are attempting to access on this web server is
currently unavailable. Please hit the "Refresh" button in your web
browser to retry your request.
Administrator Note: An error message detailing the cause of this
specific request failure can be found in the application event log of
the web server. Please review this log entry to discover what caused
this error to occur.
</quote>
> You really shouldn't run ASP.NET as the System account,
> just in case something goes wrong with the boxes' security
>
> Juan T. Llibre, asp.net MVP
> asp.net faq :http://asp.net.do/faq/
> foros de asp.net, en español :http://asp.net.do/foros/
> ======================================"Kevin Liebowicz" <linux-...@lycos.com> wrote in messagenews:1183470636.9...@k79g2000hse.googlegroups.com...
> > crap and making the transition to linux myself.- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -
Juan T. Llibre
!> Server Application Unavailable
!> The web application you are attempting to access on this web server is currently unavailable.
In Windows 2003, you have to specifically enable ASP.NET.
The default, for security reasons, is that ASP.NET is not enabled.
Open the IIS Manager, scroll on the left to "Web Service Extensions", then select
the ASP.NET version you want to allow on the right pane, and click the "Allow" button.
You can also run:
aspnet_regiis -enable
Both procedures do the same thing : enable ASP.NET to run on W2K3.
Juan T. Llibre, asp.net MVP
asp.net faq : http://asp.net.do/faq/
foros de asp.net, en español : http://asp.net.do/foros/
======================================
"Kevin Liebowicz" <linu...@lycos.com> wrote in message news:1183472158....@g4g2000hsf.googlegroups.com...
Juan T. Llibre
1. Did you setup the root site to run against ASP.NET 2.0 ?
http://bubba/default.aspx will need to run using the .Net Framework 2.0
Open the IIS Manager and, in the properties for the "Default Web Site"
( right-click it and select "Properties" ), select the ASP.NET tab,
and make sure that 2.0.50727 is selected... )
2. Did you create the Application Pool for ASP.NET 2.0 ?
( as detailed in the same article : http://msdn2.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms998297.aspx )
3. Make sure the root application is running in the Application Pool you just created.
( Again...in the Default Web Sites' properties in the IIS Manager )
Juan T. Llibre, asp.net MVP
asp.net faq : http://asp.net.do/faq/
foros de asp.net, en español : http://asp.net.do/foros/
======================================
"Kevin Liebowicz" <linu...@lycos.com> wrote in message news:1183472158....@g4g2000hsf.googlegroups.com...
Kevin Liebowicz
>
> in your case all you have to do is set up an ad-hoc service account,
> as indicated in the link I sent you :
>
> How To: Create a Service Account for an ASP.NET 2.0 Application:http://msdn2.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms998297.aspx
And by the way... other than step #3 not working (because it seems
that one needs to buy a $800 compiler in order to convince a licensed
Win2003 server to serve one simple .aspx page) the other steps are not
even close to working...
<quote>
Step 4. Create an Application Pool with a Custom Identity
To create an application pool that runs using a custom service
account
Start Internet Information Services (IIS) Manager.
In the left pane, expand the local computer and then expand
Application Pools.
</quote>
I would but there is not "Application Pools" underneath the local
computer or anywhere else in IIS Manager.
<quote>
Step 5. Configure Your Application to Run in the New Application Pool
In this step, you configure your test ASP.NET application to run in
the new application pool. This ensures that it runs using the custom
service account identity.
</quote>
Except that there is NO application pool.
WHY IS THIS SO COMPLICATED????? The normal IIS/ASP combination works
fine. Buy Microsoft really screwed the pooch on this .aspx/.net
blunder. It ought to just work "out of the box." When I installed 2003
Server it I selected to install IIS. It ought to "just work" and
people should NOT have to create custom accounts, run scripts,
configure custom pools, buy VS.net and sacrifice goats to the gods in
order for this to work.
This is not rocket science - it's one simple web page. I have WASTED
sooooo much time just trying to get this junk to work. And I'm no
closer today then I was this weekend when I started and who the hell
knows what sort of state my server is now after installing various
junk and running all sorts of incarnations of aspnet_xxxxx.exe apps.
Note to Microsoft - Unlike Vista and this debacle... try shipping
software that SIMPLY WORKS. Ever hear of KISS - Keep It Simple
Stupid????? This is way, way, way more complicated than it needs to
be or ought to be.
Sorry for the rant but I am sick and tired of spending the last 3-4
days trying to get my web server to serve one simple .aspx page. What
sort of idiot would create a product that is so damn complicated that
it requires all of these ridiculous fixes, hacks and work arounds in
order to run.
> You really shouldn't run ASP.NET as the System account,
> just in case something goes wrong with the boxes' security
>
> Juan T. Llibre, asp.net MVP
> asp.net faq :http://asp.net.do/faq/
> foros de asp.net, en español :http://asp.net.do/foros/
> ======================================"Kevin Liebowicz" <linux-...@lycos.com> wrote in messagenews:1183470636.9...@k79g2000hse.googlegroups.com...
Kevin Liebowicz
wrote:
> re:
> !> Server Application Unavailable
> !> The web application you are attempting to access on this web server is currently unavailable.
>
> In Windows 2003, you have to specifically enable ASP.NET.
> The default, for security reasons, is that ASP.NET is not enabled.
>
> Open the IIS Manager, scroll on the left to "Web Service Extensions", then select
> the ASP.NET version you want to allow on the right pane, and click the "Allow" button.
Yes - I did this yesterday.
> You can also run:
>
> aspnet_regiis -enable
>
> Both procedures do the same thing : enable ASP.NET to run on W2K3.
I did this too. I didn't realize they did the same thing.
Kevin Liebowicz
wrote:> http://bubba/default.aspxwill need to run using the .Net Framework 2.0
>
> Open the IIS Manager and, in the properties for the "Default Web Site"
> ( right-click it and select "Properties" ), select the ASP.NET tab,
> and make sure that 2.0.50727 is selected... )
It is selected and it is the only option that's available.
On this tab there's an entry for "File location" which is c:\inetpub
\wwwroot\web.config. - There is no such file. Should there be? Where
does this file come from?
Since there is no web.config file both entries for "File creation
date" and "File last mod" read "Date not available."
But if I go up one level (Web Sites - which is at the same level as
FTP Sites) and I go to the same dialog tab it has this which does
exist:
C:\WINNT\Microsoft.NET\Framework\v2.0.50727\config\web.config
> 2. Did you create the Application Pool for ASP.NET 2.0 ?
> ( as detailed in the same article :http://msdn2.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms998297.aspx)
NO - Because the instructions say to expand the "Application Pools"
item in IIS manager. This does NOT exist on my computer. Without
Application Pools there's simply nothing to configure.
> 3. Make sure the root application is running in the Application Pool you just created.
> ( Again...in the Default Web Sites' properties in the IIS Manager )
My configuration doesn't have any Application Pools. And I have no
idea where I would set this if I did have an application pool. I right
click on the web-site and select properties. But I don't see anything
anywhere that lets me select an application pool. What tab is this on?
> Juan T. Llibre, asp.net MVP
> asp.net faq :http://asp.net.do/faq/
> foros de asp.net, en español :http://asp.net.do/foros/
> ======================================"Kevin Liebowicz" <linux-...@lycos.com> wrote in messagenews:1183472158....@g4g2000hsf.googlegroups.com...
> > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
Kevin Liebowicz
> re:
> !> I would but there is not "Application Pools" underneath the local
> !> computer or anywhere else in IIS Manager.
>
> Did you install, at least, the Web or Standard versions of Windows Server 2003 ?
As far as I know it's the "Standard" version of 2003 server. The
system properties reports "Windows Server 2003. Standard Edition.
Version 5.2 Build 3790.srv03_sp2_gdr.070304-2240: Service Pack 2"
> You should be seeing what is in the attached image
> ( with your own computer's name on it, of course ).
>
> Do you see anything similar ?
It's similar but not the same. I'm posting through Google groups so I
can't attach a screen shot but here's a description of how mine looks.
Top level - Internet Information Services... just like your screen
shot.
Next level - BUBBA (local computer)... just like yours but with my
computer name.
Below BUBBA (local computer) I have "FTP Sites" with a small red "X"
because the FTP server isn't running.
Followed by a folder for "Web Sites"... just like your screen shot.
Followed by a folder for "Web Service Extensions"... just like your
screen shot.
I do NOT have a folder for "Application Pools" or a folder for
"Default SMTP Virtual Server" - I don't ever recall seeing these
folders.
> re:
> !> It ought to just work "out of the box."
>
> It normally does, except when you choose to install IIS on a domain controller.
Why would this matter?? It's a server and it ought to be able to do
more than one thing at a time. It's a completely artificial limitation
not to be able to run a web server and a Active Directory on the same
machine. Because I want a small web-site in my house shouldn't force
me to buy another computer. This one is already sitting idle 99.99% of
the time.
> re:
> !> When I installed 2003 Server it I selected to install IIS. It ought to "just work"
> !> and people should NOT have to create custom accounts, run scripts, configure custom pools
>
> People normally don't have to do that...because they don't install IIS on domain controllers.
> Sorry, Kevin, but you have brought this on yourself.
I disagree. It's not like I did anything non-standard or out of the
ordinary. The official Microsoft install CD that I have includes both
the Active Directory and IIS components on the same physical CD. There
is no reason (other than selling another license) why one server can't
do more than one thing. It handles a household of 5 people. I'm not
going to buy another box, and another license just so that I can put
the web-server on a different machine. That's crazy. A "server" can
and should be able to do more than one thing at once. You know, like
"multi-tasking".
> If you don't have the need for a domain controller ( and, since you are only running
> a standalone server you don't), I'd install W2K3 in a different partition, as a standalone server,
> and not as a domain controller, and install IIS.
I DO have a need for a domain controller. I want a central place to
manage all of my computers including the computers that my wife and
kids use. I want a single place that manages all passwords and
authentication. I want a single place that all computers "login" to
where I can push service packes, security updates and other things to
all of the machines automatically without having to run around the
house and update each machine manually. I want to be able to centrally
control how much time my kids spend on the computer on school nights.
I use folder redirection so that when I log into any machine in the
house my desktop, "My Documents" and everything else that I care about
is right there for me. Everyones "My Documents" is redirected to the
server to make backing up data easy.
So I don't understand your statement of "since I'm only running a
standalone server I don't have the need for a domain controller." Is
there any way to do all of the above without a domain controller?
> It *will* work "out of the box", as soon as you enable ASP.NET.
>
>
>
> Juan T. Llibre, asp.net MVP
> asp.net faq : http://asp.net.do/faq/
> foros de asp.net, en español : http://asp.net.do/foros/
> ======================================
> "Kevin Liebowicz" <linu...@lycos.com> wrote in message news:1183474206....@k79g2000hse.googlegroups.com...
> On Jul 3, 9:57 am, "Juan T. Llibre" <nomailrepl...@nowhere.com> wrote:
>
Dev Null
> Yes, I wasted the past two days trying to fix this.
> Yes, this is on a Win2003 Server.
> Yes, this machine is a domain controller.
I had the same problem late last year and never got anywhere with it.
Microsoft wants to sell you another software license to run everything.
Seems that one Linux server is more than capable of running Apache, LDAP,
MySQL, SendMail and a slew of other software. Microsoft servers on the other
hand can only run two apps at once, a virus checker and an application of
your choice.
I'll bet you dollars to donuts that if you want to run a web server,
database, active directory, mail server, etc. then the answer will be that
you need to buy a dedicated machine for each task. Mark my words. Each
Mickeysoft "server" can barely function as a single-purpose dedicated
server. It's a joke.
--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com
Dev Null
Obviously what they're telling you is that IIS is not compatible with
Microsoft's own server product. Dump IIS and install Apache. It's faster,
uses less resources and can do everything that IIS does using standard (not
propreitary) open source technologies. Check out ruby on rails. It's great
technology that's easy to configure and use. By the time you get IIS working
on Windows you could have written your entire app using Apache and ruby on
rails. http://www.rubyonrails.org/
Most importantly, unlike Microsoft's own products, both Apache and Ruby on
Rails *IS* compatible with Windows 2003 server. Although eventually you'll
probably want to dump that server too and get something that can run more
than one task + a virus checker at a time.
Juan T. Llibre
!> I do NOT have a folder for "Application Pools"
Sorry to tell you this...but you probably have a bad IIS installation.
That folder *should* be there if you installed IIS 6.0 on W2K3.
The only thing which occurs to me is that you might be running IIS 6.0 in IIS 5.0 compatibility mode.
Then, Application Pools would not be available.
If you are not running IIS 6.0 in IIS 5.0 compatibility mode, you can try one of two things:
1. Uninstall and reinstall IIS
or
2. Install W2K3 into a fresh partition.
Uninstalling/reinstalling IIS isn't too painful.
You can get that done inside of a half hour.
re:.
!> or a folder for "Default SMTP Virtual Server"
That doesn't have to be there. It only shows if you have installed the SMTP server.
re:
!> I DO have a need for a domain controller.
If you do, that's fine.
You *can* run IIS in a domain controller, provided you run ASP.NET
as a custom account, following the details in the link I provided.
What you should *not* do is run ASP.NET as the System account,
even if you think you're sufficiently protected.
Kevin Liebowicz
> re:
> !> I do NOT have a folder for "Application Pools"
>
> Sorry to tell you this...but you probably have a bad IIS installation.
> That folder *should* be there if you installed IIS 6.0 on W2K3.
Arrrghhh. The folder is definitely -not- there. I rebooted and checked
again. Nothing.
> The only thing which occurs to me is that you might be running IIS 6.0 in IIS 5.0 compatibility mode.
> Then, Application Pools would not be available.
How do I tell? AFAIK all of my .asp apps have been running just fine
for the past several years. I know have a need to server just
one .aspx page and this is what I'm running into. Not that it's
impossible but I don't see anything anywhere telling me that I'm
running in 5.0 compat mode.
> If you are not running IIS 6.0 in IIS 5.0 compatibility mode, you can try one of two things:
>
> 1. Uninstall and reinstall IIS
Not fun but the lesser of two evils.
> or
> 2. Install W2K3 into a fresh partition.
No thanks. It took me years to configure the domain, login scripts and
everything else "just right" so I'm not going to nuke everything in
hopes that it might fix this.
> Uninstalling/reinstalling IIS isn't too painful.
> You can get that done inside of a half hour.
>
> re:.
> !> or a folder for "Default SMTP Virtual Server"
>
> That doesn't have to be there. It only shows if you have installed the SMTP server.
It's unlikely that I installed the SMTP server. It's mail anyhow so it
shouldn't be related to this. But then again... the fact that I run a
domain controller is VERY related to running a web-server so you can
never be sure.
> re:
> !> I DO have a need for a domain controller.
>
> If you do, that's fine.
>
> You *can* run IIS in a domain controller, provided you run ASP.NET
> as a custom account, following the details in the link I provided.
>
> What you should *not* do is run ASP.NET as the System account,
> even if you think you're sufficiently protected.
Well Juan... it turns out that there is GOOD news after all. My
machine.cfg file did NOT have userName and password field in the
processModel tag. So I added one, rebooted for good measure and ran
the little code snippet from the URL that you sent me.
Guess what... it @#$*! works. Here's the output that I got.
<quote>
Windows Identity Check
Name: FAMILY\aspxuseraccount
</quote>
This "aspxuseraccount" is the account that I created when I started
following the steps in the link you provided. I'm very experienced
with ASP and all of this .NET and .aspx stuff is completely foreign to
me but what I think this is telling me is that *ALL* of my .aspx
scripts will run in the context of this account.
The real test is this one page in this web-app that I bought. I hit
the page... wait a couple of seconds and voila! It freakin works. I
have no idea why it works but adding the username/password fields in
the <processmodel> tag seemed to get things running. I still don't
have a "application pools" item but I really don't care at this point.
Thanks again and take care.
- Kevin
Juan T. Llibre
!> Guess what... it @#$*! works. Here's the output that I got.
!> <quote>
!> Windows Identity Check
!> Name: FAMILY\aspxuseraccount
!> </quote>
heh... sometimes going back over suggestions already made pays off.
This is definitely one of those cases.
re:
!> what I think this is telling me is that *ALL* of my .aspx
!> scripts will run in the context of this account.
Exactly. That's what will happen.
re:
!> adding the username/password fields in
!> the <processmodel> tag seemed to get things running.
I think that was the *first* thing I suggested,
although it was in the context of the System account.
I should have been a bit more specific and reminded you that if you use a different
account (like aspxuseraccount) *that* is the acount which goes in that property.
re:
!> I still don't have a "application pools" item but I really don't care at this point.
You don't really need them, unless you're going to run different .Net Framework applications.
Then, you'd have to assign 1.1 apps, 2.0 apps and 3.0 apps to different Application Pools.
re:
!> Thanks again and take care.
You're quite welcome...and I will.
You took a huge step today, Kevin.
Congratulations...and enjoy fiddling with ASP.NET!
Juan T. Llibre, asp.net MVP
asp.net faq : http://asp.net.do/faq/
foros de asp.net, en español : http://asp.net.do/foros/
======================================
"Kevin Liebowicz" <linu...@lycos.com> wrote in message news:1183493337.6...@q69g2000hsb.googlegroups.com...
Rbrt
professional developer and the reason I have IIS running on a domain
controller is that I have a small development network with a server (domain
controller/web server/SQL Server) and a couple of workstations. The server
also serves as a test deployment server for applications I build for my
customers. This should not be unusual given the population of MSDN members
(of which I am one). I have talked to a handful of them at Microsoft events
who do the same thing.
My server is Win 2003 Server standard, which I upgraded from Win 2000
Server. This in itself was a nightmare and I had to burn one of my 4 support
incidents to get it done. Took two days altogether. I couldn't believe how
badly it went. All of my software comes from my MSDN subscription.
Now I am trying to deploy an ASP.NET 2.0 app to the server from the
development workstation to testbed it.
I have all the same symptoms as Kevin - no applicatin pools (they were there
when I installed ASP.NET 2.0 on the Win 2000 server before I upgraded, and
now have disappeared), same error messages in the app log. I did all of the
things specified in the KB articles as well as the stuff recommended in this
thread.
The big difference for me is that I put the user account and password in the
machine.config file and it still does not work.
Please do not lecture me about not running IIS on a domain controller. This
is a development environment and it is very tightly secured behind a
firewall. And please, no lame comments from the Linux crowd, OK? We've heard
it all before. When my customers switch to Linux, then may6be I will too.
Until then, I work with what they've got.
Any advice from anybody else out there who has gone through this nightmare
would be greatly appreciated.
Thanks
Robert