On Oct 1, 2010, at 2:57 PM, Ray Van Dolson wrote:
> On Fri, Oct 01, 2010 at 02:47:09PM -0700, aurfalien@xxxxxxxxx wrote:
>>
>> On Oct 1, 2010, at 2:16 PM, Steve Thompson wrote:
>>
>>> On Fri, 1 Oct 2010, Craig White wrote:
>>>
>>>> As for OpenLDAP being a royal PITA, I suppose that's a matter of
>>>> perspective because I've been using it for at least 7 years now and
>>>> it
>>>> works for me without any problems whatsoever.
>>>
>>> Agreed. I have found that LDAP, in the guise of OpenLDAP, is not
>>> very
>>> difficult at all once you have done your first setup, providing, as
>>> Craig
>>> says, you take the time to understand why you're doing what you're
>>> doing
>>> and you properly plan ahead. OpenLDAP also has excellent performance
>>> and
>>> is as solid as a rock.
>>>
>>> Steve
>>
>> Whats bizarre is the NIS/LDAP gateway that padl.com sells starting at
>> $1500.
>>
>> I said screw it and just migrated over to OpenLDAP.
>>
>> Didn't think it was a PITA but then again, all IT is a PITA so non of
>> it is if you catch my drift.
>>
>> I mean if its all a PITA, then its not a PITA cuz PITA is PITA if
>> there is no PITA to compare to.
>>
>
> Note that Samba 3.3.x integrates pretty well with AD via winbind. If
> you can get good external uid mapping going you can even preserve
> UID's
> from your NIS environments.
Not for every one, but I scrapped using Samba as it quadruples your
LDIFs and use pGina for Windows client auth to LDAP. Now I realize
that LDAP is really fast but I just hated how my LDIFs looked after
Samba got a hold of em. Samba is an awesome project so I'm not dissin
them at all.
Again, I realize not a fit for every env, but I was lucky in not
having any large AD/Windows population to deal with, perhaps only a
few hundred is all.
-aurf
_______________________________________________
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@xxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
