none
[MS-OXCFXICS] Use of fast transfer ROPs with EcDoConnect / EcDoRpc? RRS feed

  • Question

  • Hi,

    In a previous question, I asked about sequencing of RopTellVersion. I'm pretty confident I'm now doing it roughly right, except that we don't (yet) support EcDoConnectEx / EcDoRpc2, so I'm using EcDoConnect and EcDoRpc. Here is a wireshark capture.
    http://www.frogmouth.net/RopTellVersion.pcap

    In packet 77, you can see the response to my "Tell Version", which is MAPI_E_NO_SUPPORT. I'm assuming that the Exchange 2007 server is compatible with itself (I'm actually sending back the same server version that is reported in EcDoConnect, for the purposes of this unit test), so I wonder if there is a problem using the older protocol forms.

    [I recognise this is very marginal for spec coverage, I'm just trying to figure out whether we can expect it to work with EcDoConnect / EcDoRpc or not.]

    If it supposed to work, can you suggest what might be going wrong with the transaction for RopTellVersion?
    Thursday, February 18, 2010 1:20 AM

Answers

  • Hi Brad,

    The RopTellVersion is specific to the FastTransfer download and/or upload context object.   In [MS-OXCFXICS] section 3.3.4.1.2.1 Server-to-Client-to-Server gives you the sequence on how to use RopTellVersion.  There is a check to verify that it's either a upload or download conect object and if not it returns MAPI_E_NO_SUPPORT.

    Hope this helps.


    Senior Consultant
    • Marked as answer by Brad Hards Thursday, February 18, 2010 6:47 AM
    Thursday, February 18, 2010 5:30 AM
    Moderator

All replies

  • Hi Brad,

    The RopTellVersion is specific to the FastTransfer download and/or upload context object.   In [MS-OXCFXICS] section 3.3.4.1.2.1 Server-to-Client-to-Server gives you the sequence on how to use RopTellVersion.  There is a check to verify that it's either a upload or download conect object and if not it returns MAPI_E_NO_SUPPORT.

    Hope this helps.


    Senior Consultant
    • Marked as answer by Brad Hards Thursday, February 18, 2010 6:47 AM
    Thursday, February 18, 2010 5:30 AM
    Moderator
  • OK, I was (foolishly) assuming that it was on the Store object.

    Let me implement some more of this...
    Thursday, February 18, 2010 6:47 AM