Pocket PC 2003 LSP Install Inconsistent

Dear gurus,

We're running the passthru-type winsock Layered Service Provider
based on the Platform Builder 4.2 sample code on an iPAQ of the
recent vintage. Two Pocket PC (as opposed to vanilla WinCE 4.2)
changes Microsoft recommended have indeed been applied to the code.
When the LSP is installed on the fly (through the INST_LSP program
supplied in the Platform Builder), very few applications load and
use the LSP DLL. ActiveSync is among them, however, if started
after the LSP install. Internet Explorer is not, even if started
afterwards. The device.exe and services.exe are not either which
is understandable due to the very helpful blog by Igor Dvorkin,
thanks a lot:

http://blogs.msdn.com/cenet/archive/2004/12/07/277890.aspx

Ok, when the install code is transferred to the DllRegisterServer()
export within the DLL itself and the WS2 Registry is configured
appropriately, the device.exe and services.exe do in fact start
loading and using the LSP DLL upon the soft restart. Moreover,
some of the other apps like the platform manager (cemgrc.exe),
process viewer (cepwcli.exe), VC++ Spy (cespycli.exe) load and
use the LSP as well. However, most applications like ActiveSync
and Internet Explorer do not. What might be the reason? The LSP
needs to observe all the sockets, not just some.

I see that the ssllsp.dll is in fact loaded and used by virtually
all relevant apps. What does it do differently? The LSP of mine
is installing itself over all base providers for the time being,
just like the sample code. The DllRegisterServer() reports no
install issues anywhere, and the run-time trace seems reasonable
when the DLL is used. The DllRegisterServer() returns S_OK, just
like the real server registration. Should I start playing with
the WSAPROTOCOL_INFOW members?

Many thanks for your insights,
Ilya Faenson
Rockville, MD USA
ifaenson@hotmail.com

Ajay
Wed Feb 02 23:54:26 CST 2005

When you install LSP using DllRegisterServer() during boot time, order of
LSP installation can not be controlled on CE 4.2. In this case almost always
SSL LSP will be installed on the top in the catalog and will be used by all
the APPs like IE etc. As SSL LSP is installed over Base providers so your
LSP will never be called. You can check the order of your LSP in the catalog
using WSCEnumProtocols().

When you install LSP on-the-fly then any application which has started
before that will not use your lsp.

-Ajay

<ifaenson@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:1107273646.520405.305250@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com...
> Dear gurus,
>
> We're running the passthru-type winsock Layered Service Provider
> based on the Platform Builder 4.2 sample code on an iPAQ of the
> recent vintage. Two Pocket PC (as opposed to vanilla WinCE 4.2)
> changes Microsoft recommended have indeed been applied to the code.
> When the LSP is installed on the fly (through the INST_LSP program
> supplied in the Platform Builder), very few applications load and
> use the LSP DLL. ActiveSync is among them, however, if started
> after the LSP install. Internet Explorer is not, even if started
> afterwards. The device.exe and services.exe are not either which
> is understandable due to the very helpful blog by Igor Dvorkin,
> thanks a lot:
>
> http://blogs.msdn.com/cenet/archive/2004/12/07/277890.aspx
>
> Ok, when the install code is transferred to the DllRegisterServer()
> export within the DLL itself and the WS2 Registry is configured
> appropriately, the device.exe and services.exe do in fact start
> loading and using the LSP DLL upon the soft restart. Moreover,
> some of the other apps like the platform manager (cemgrc.exe),
> process viewer (cepwcli.exe), VC++ Spy (cespycli.exe) load and
> use the LSP as well. However, most applications like ActiveSync
> and Internet Explorer do not. What might be the reason? The LSP
> needs to observe all the sockets, not just some.
>
> I see that the ssllsp.dll is in fact loaded and used by virtually
> all relevant apps. What does it do differently? The LSP of mine
> is installing itself over all base providers for the time being,
> just like the sample code. The DllRegisterServer() reports no
> install issues anywhere, and the run-time trace seems reasonable
> when the DLL is used. The DllRegisterServer() returns S_OK, just
> like the real server registration. Should I start playing with
> the WSAPROTOCOL_INFOW members?
>
> Many thanks for your insights,
> Ilya Faenson
> Rockville, MD USA
> ifaenson@hotmail.com
>

ifaenson
Fri Feb 04 17:32:49 CST 2005

Ajay,

Thank you for your response. One could actually control the order of
LSPs in CE 4.2 some, but that was not an issue here. Virtually nothing
TCP/IP related worked when I installed my LSP on the top. I've worked
around the real issue with the help from Microsoft, and we will
hopefully hear from them shortly in this respect.

Meanwhile, all processes, including the IE, now happen to load the LSP
of mine. The genuine traffic from many applications now passes through
the LSP - all ActiveSync related, performance tools, ftp client etc.
However, I only see very few calls coming in from the IE, primarily
those infamous failing WSPStringToAddress() calls passing in URLs as
opposed to IP addresses which have been discussed here before. I
observe no sends or receives. I've not tried browsing to secure sites,
so no SSL should be in the picture whatsoever. Who could be hiding the
IE data? I can see it in the NDIS intermediate driver of mine, so it
is certainly around. :-)

Many thanks for your insights,
Ilya Faenson
Rockville, MD USA
ifaenson@hotmail.com

ganesan
Mon Feb 07 15:28:00 CST 2005

Sorry to interrupt here.

Since you guys are discussing the LSP for windows CE., i would like to
ask a question if you don't mind.

I tried to use the Sample that came with platform builder 4.2 . I get
error(NULL) in the following function in the WSPStartup() funtcion.
Bascially Overlapped Reuqest failed.

lpWPUCompleteOverlappedRequest = (LPWPUCOMPLETEOVERLAPPEDREQUEST)
GetProcAddress (hWS2_32, _T("WPUCompleteOverlappedRequest"));


If you guys don't mind could you please let me know why?

Thanks very much
Ganesan

SQLSERVERUSERDISPLAYNAME
Tue Feb 08 16:41:04 CST 2005

I needed to post my message and this is the only way I can get it on this
damn message board. I click on new post, but get nothing. So, forgive me for
someone else stupidity

I am using Layered service provider dll which intercepts the connect(),
send() and recv() calls. I am not doing anything on the connect, howver on
the send and recv functions, I do some processing. On the Send request, I
check client request and based on a criteria, I decide to block the
connection or allow it, but the decsion is defferred until I get a recv
request by the same client socket becuase I don't have a way to send the
calling application such as IE that the request is denided on a send request.
What I am looking for is some someone who has an idea how I can send the
client back a response without waiting on the recv request to inform the
client.

Ajay
Tue Feb 08 23:05:19 CST 2005

Ganesan,

Are you working on Pocket PC 2003? If yes then GetProcAddress (hWS2_32,
_T("WPUCompleteOverlappedRequest") returns NULL on Pocket PC. It is supposed
to work on Windows CE only. To make it work you can simply remove the next
if statement or make it something like this- if (1).

Thanks,
-Ajay


<ganesan.nagrajan@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1107811680.151622.265690@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com...
> Sorry to interrupt here.
>
> Since you guys are discussing the LSP for windows CE., i would like to
> ask a question if you don't mind.
>
> I tried to use the Sample that came with platform builder 4.2 . I get
> error(NULL) in the following function in the WSPStartup() funtcion.
> Bascially Overlapped Reuqest failed.
>
> lpWPUCompleteOverlappedRequest = (LPWPUCOMPLETEOVERLAPPEDREQUEST)
> GetProcAddress (hWS2_32, _T("WPUCompleteOverlappedRequest"));
>
>
> If you guys don't mind could you please let me know why?
>
> Thanks very much
> Ganesan
>

ganesan
Thu Feb 10 21:30:03 CST 2005

First of all I am sorry for "Mr. ifaen...@hotmail.com" since I seem to
have interrupted posting flow. I didn't know I am not suppose to ask a
question in between. I hope he gets his help.

Thanks much for the answer.

I Did that before posting this message. It went thru and was able to
see Infrared traffic but it Hung when I craddled the device (Probably
WAN packets couldn't go thru) and I did NOT see any internet packets
Probably its the loading order you guys are discussing here (or) Mr.
ifaen... knows how to tackle this issue.

Thanks again
Ganesan

ganesan
Thu Feb 10 22:20:59 CST 2005

Just to add to my previous message.

The reason to ask that question was I thought commenting the if
statement was wrong, since it didn't behave well for most of the
traffic.

Ajay
Tue Mar 22 16:11:13 CST 2005

Ilya,

I also ran into the same issue you have mentioned blow. My LSP is not able
to intercept
any traffic from IE on PocketPC, thogh I see all the traffic related to
Active Sync. I see no
send, recieves and connect from IE to any web server. Did you find the
solution for this issue?

Any help would be highly appreciated.

Thanks,
-Ajay


<ifaenson@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:1107559968.988168.321770@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
> Ajay,
>
> Thank you for your response. One could actually control the order of
> LSPs in CE 4.2 some, but that was not an issue here. Virtually nothing
> TCP/IP related worked when I installed my LSP on the top. I've worked
> around the real issue with the help from Microsoft, and we will
> hopefully hear from them shortly in this respect.
>
> Meanwhile, all processes, including the IE, now happen to load the LSP
> of mine. The genuine traffic from many applications now passes through
> the LSP - all ActiveSync related, performance tools, ftp client etc.
> However, I only see very few calls coming in from the IE, primarily
> those infamous failing WSPStringToAddress() calls passing in URLs as
> opposed to IP addresses which have been discussed here before. I
> observe no sends or receives. I've not tried browsing to secure sites,
> so no SSL should be in the picture whatsoever. Who could be hiding the
> IE data? I can see it in the NDIS intermediate driver of mine, so it
> is certainly around. :-)
>
> Many thanks for your insights,
> Ilya Faenson
> Rockville, MD USA
> ifaenson@hotmail.com
>

jeremy
Fri Mar 24 10:55:18 CST 2006

I have the same problem on wince5.0. I cannot capture WSPSend from IE in my
LSP. I have read all the blogs, all the newsgroups, no luck. I have
altered my installer as noted in igor's blogs. I have hacked around for
days with no progress.

Has anyone actually solved this problem?

Thanks,
Jeremy

"Ajay Agrawal" <ajay_agr@epatra.com> wrote in message
news:e5msSwyLFHA.1096@tk2msftngp13.phx.gbl...
> Ilya,
>
> I also ran into the same issue you have mentioned blow. My LSP is not able
> to intercept
> any traffic from IE on PocketPC, thogh I see all the traffic related to
> Active Sync. I see no
> send, recieves and connect from IE to any web server. Did you find the
> solution for this issue?
>
> Any help would be highly appreciated.
>
> Thanks,
> -Ajay
>
>

chrisnews
Wed Apr 12 16:56:42 CDT 2006

I am in the identical situation. I'm not seeing sends or receives from
Pocket IE, and I believe that I have read all of the relevant newsgroup
/ blog postings. Anybody have any luck here?

Thanks!

jeremy evers wrote:
> I have the same problem on wince5.0. I cannot capture WSPSend from IE in my
> LSP. I have read all the blogs, all the newsgroups, no luck. I have
> altered my installer as noted in igor's blogs. I have hacked around for
> days with no progress.
>
> Has anyone actually solved this problem?
>
> Thanks,
> Jeremy
>
> "Ajay Agrawal" <ajay_agr@epatra.com> wrote in message
> news:e5msSwyLFHA.1096@tk2msftngp13.phx.gbl...
> > Ilya,
> >
> > I also ran into the same issue you have mentioned blow. My LSP is not able
> > to intercept
> > any traffic from IE on PocketPC, thogh I see all the traffic related to
> > Active Sync. I see no
> > send, recieves and connect from IE to any web server. Did you find the
> > solution for this issue?
> >
> > Any help would be highly appreciated.
> >
> > Thanks,
> > -Ajay
> >
> >