I can't give you a definitive answer about issues you might run into if your
assembly doesn't have a strong name. Outlook's own security model doesn't
know anything about strong names, so it's not relevant there. But in terms
of .NET Framework security an assembly must have a strong name to be
explicitly granted trust. So in answer to your second question: depending on
how the target environment is configured the lack of a strong name could be
a show stopper.

BTW, if you are going to elevate the potential level of trust for your
Redemption interop assembly then as a good citizen you should make it more
secure by fully customizing it with modified class name and GUIDs
http://www.dimastr.com/redemption/security.htm
And an alternative way to give it a strong name is to generate the interop
assembly using tlbimp.exe which accepts a /keyfile option
http://msdn.microsoft.com/library/de...rTlbimpexe.asp

"Rog" wrote in message
...
Would you potentially have any issues if you do not use a strong name?
Would it help my .net 1.1 addin to work in .net 2.0?
Rog

Dave Kane [MVP - Outlook] wrote:
It's good to assign strong names to your assemblies, but a strong-named
assembly can't reference any assembly with a simple name which is why you
are getting that compile error. You will need to use Assembly Linker
(al.exe) to give your Redemption interop assembly a strong name by
signing it with your keyfile
http://msdn2.microsoft.com/en-us/lib...41(VS.80).aspx

"Rog" wrote in message
...
I am trying to sign my C# Outlook Add-in. Is it wise to do ?
Necessary?
When I do this and compile I get an error: Interop.Redemption does not
have a strong name..
Any ideas on how to fix this?
Thanks