>Hey Viv,
>
>>I see you have a solution that you are happy with (although I'm inclined to agree with Al) so please feel free to let the subject drop but I'm still curious about this. If I understand correctly then the implication is that by specifying the server endpoint address as an IP address rather than a machine name the server was able to authenticate the client. I just can't see how that would have helped - the server itself would be no wiser than it was before....
>
>My thinking was it must have something to do with the domain controller knowing the IPs of the computers in its domain ... so perhaps you're right that the DNS wasn't properly set up, because the domain controller should know that too.

But with security off somehow the system resolved the machine name of the host server.....
But let's drop it - I can pick away at this stuff indefinitely and you have code to write :-}


>>Again out of curiousity: From the above it appears that you are using clustering primarily for load balancing rather than just for failover purposes. I've always thought of that scenario as more applicable to internet bases apps. If this is an *intranet* app then presumably the WCF service has some pretty hefty lifting to do (or there's one heck of a big intranet) ?
>
>Yes, load balancing. The scenario is for an integrated approach to exchanging information (messages) between various public safety agencies (police, fire, dispatch, jail etc.). This could be for agencies in one city, in a large metro-area, in a county, etc. For a major city or metro-area, the amount of messaging traffic passed around could be quite high-volume.

OK - that makes sense.

>>Don't suppose you considered pushing the whole thing out to the cloud to avoid all the problems associated with configuring your own clustering setup :-}
>
>We could certainly support a cloud-based scenario ... but I doubt if most cop shops would want their information that much out of their control. <g> Our customers will generally have very knowledgeable IT staffs; they can configure the clustering stuff themselves. We're not gonna do it for them. <g>

But won't just *one* of the agencies then have to take responsibility for hosting the service ?