Binding Name Query in CoreWCF #46
Description
Which sample is the bug for
Describe the bug
I'm currently transitioning from ASMX to CoreWCF and noticed a difference in the binding naming convention. In ASMX, we've been able to name our bindings simply, for example: "GetAppReportSoap". However, in CoreWCF, it seems that the binding name also requires the contract name, resulting in something like: "GetAppReportSoap_IGetAppReportSoap".
Could you please clarify if this is the expected behavior, or if there is a way to use simple binding names in CoreWCF similar to what we had in ASMX?
To Reproduce
Steps to reproduce the behavior:
- Build application'
- Copy the WSDL service.
- Check the WSDL service URL in the Soap application.
- See the change in the image below.
Expected behavior
The expected behavior is shown in green, whereas the actual behavior is highlighted in red below the image.
Repo environment (please complete the following information):
- OS: Windows
- .NET Version 6.0
- IDE or command line builds
Additional context