Craig White <craigwhite@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> I hesitate to go on this divergent path but I was never
> convinced that Red Hat has opened their heart to
openldap...
> RHEL 3 after all shipped the ancient 2.07 version
Red Hat Linux 8/9 is well over 3 years old!
RHEL 3 is based on that.
> and RHEL 4 continues to languish with a partially broken
> 2.2.13
Fedora Core 2/3 is now over 18 months old.
RHEL 4 is based on that.
> and only recently have they finally tried to integrate a
> broken but commendable effort of openldap & kerberos in
FC-4
And now you know _why_ they decided to go NsDS last year.
Because OpenLDAP 2.2 at the time was really missing a lot
without requiring a lot of site customization.
Unlike the few vendors who tried to integrate a "basic"
OpenLDAP with maybe a Samba schema and store at best, Red Hat
wanted a _true_ LDAP + Certificate + Kerberos + etc... setup
out-of-the-box for UNIX networks (not just Windows/e-mail).
The only good OpenLDAP implementations I've seen are the ones
where people put a _lot_ of effort into their own, custom
schema. It's really an undertaking, and not one I'd even
want to look at. Again, outside of some cookbook
OpenLDAP+Samba setups, there is a _lot_ that OpenLDAP
requires someone to integrate that NsDS did well off-the-bat.
Especially the ADS integration portions where NsDS is a
_peer_ or "master" to ADS, not just its "bitch" (member
server and _not_ really a directory server ;-).
--
Bryan J. Smith | Sent from Yahoo Mail
mailto:b.j.smith@xxxxxxxx | (please excuse any
http://thebs413.blogspot.com/ | missing headers)
