Re: Fix passwd/shadow/group files? -- Samba 3.0 v. ADS v. CIFS

[feizhou at graffiti.net (Feizhou)]

Bryan J. Smith wrote:

>On Sun, 2005-07-17 at 22:29 +0800, Feizhou wrote:
>  
>
>>Since when did Samba manage to pull off become an ADS DC for Windows 
>>2000/XP workstations?
>>    
>>
>
>At this point, you're hopelessly lost.  I can keep talking about it, but
>you won't get it until you have some "technical background."
>  
>
You assume too much and you are not clear enough in what you post.

>First off, read up on Samba 3.0.  It is a set of "technologies" for
>Windows interoperability.  To emulate an ADS DC, you have to add LDAP
>and MS Kerberos into the mix.  It _only_ emulates it to a point.
>
>  
>
Geez....I've been trying to get whether you are saying there was a way 
to do the whole ADS DC thing without a MS-Kerberos in the mix.

>The only "big issue" is what Microsoft is doing with ADS.  MS is
>purposely tying its services to its own MS LDAP schema and interfaces
>into that schema, in order to make all networks completely reliant on
>its own, native ADS.  This will be a "moving target" for Samba.
>
>The key is to _not_ adopt MS services that require those ADS-only schema
>and interfaces -- e.g., MS Exchange, MS SQL Server, etc...  Enterprise
>with 10,000+ nodes do _not_ because they do not scale.  In the worst
>case, they limit their exposure to them -- "regionalize" or
>"departmentalize" their deployment.
>
>
>  
>
How do you get centralized user account management without MS Kerberos?