CFXIXI工作室首页
CF西西的博客 | BasicHttpBinding vs wsHttpBinding vs WebHttpBinding 三者的区别

BasicHttpBinding vs wsHttpBinding vs WebHttpBinding 三者的区别

9. 四月 2013

简单的说的话WebHttpBinding是基于rest方式的wcf,用户可以通过自定义url进行访问

而BasicHttpBinding 和 wsHttpBinding都是基于soap的wcf,需要在本地实例化一个client进行绑定,这两者的区别在于BasicHttpBinding 基于soap 1.1 适合于任何客户端进行调用适用性更强,而 wsHttpBinding 有则有更多的安全特性。

参考:

You're comparing apples to oranges here:

  • webHttpBinding is the REST-style binding, where you basically just hit a URL and get back a truckload of XML or JSON from the web service

  • basicHttpBinding and wsHttpBinding are two SOAP-based bindings which is quite different from REST. SOAP has the advantage of having WSDL and XSD to describe the service, its methods, and the data being passed around in great detail (REST doesn't have anything like that - yet). On the other hand, you can't just browse to a wsHttpBinding endpoint with your browser and look at XML - you have to use a SOAP client, e.g. the WcfTestClient or your own app.

So your first decision must be: REST vs. SOAP (or you can expose both types of endpoints from your service - that's possible, too).

Then, between basicHttpBinding and wsHttpBinding, there differences are as follows:

  • basicHttpBinding is the very basic binding - SOAP 1.1, not much in terms of security, not much else in terms of features - but compatible to just about any SOAP client out there --> great for interoperability, weak on features and security

  • wsHttpBinding is the full-blown binding, which supports a ton of WS-* features and standards - it has lots more security features, you can use sessionful connections, you can use reliable messaging, you can use transactional control - just a lot more stuff, but wsHttpBinding is also a lot *heavier" and adds a lot of overhead to your messages as they travel across the network

For an in-depth comparison (including a table and code examples) between the two check out this codeproject article: Differences between BasicHttpBinding and WsHttpBinding

.NET