Glenn wrote:
The Windows Sync documentation indicates that Windows Sync will populate an
Active Directory, but I find this difficult to believe given the
limitations noted above.
Erum, it will provided you don't feed it bad data.
I admit that I haven't tried working with the
schema. I'm thinking it might be faster to export an ldif from the
Directory Server, clean it up with a word processor, and import it into AD
using the Microsoft ldifde tool.
But will synchronization work any better than initialization, given the
differences that will exist between data in the two directories? Should I
remove all the entries from the Directory Server after cleaning up the ldif,
and import that into the Directory Server as well as the AD? -Glenn.
It depends on what your overall goal is. If you want sync (which implies
a long
term relationship between AD and FDS) then you should use sync. If all
you're
looking for is a way to import users into AD then please do not use
Windows Sync for that.
Overall the problem you are seeing I suspect is that the FDS Windows
Sync feature
was _not_ designed to cope with old Netscape DS data (from the Netscape
Windows Sync
feature). While the two share similar names for attributes and
capabilities, they are
entirely different and maintaining data compatibility was not a goal for
the FDS feature.
The old Netscape sync feature was designed to work with NT4 and it turns
out that
MS made changes to user schema in AD that are not compatible.
It would probably be possible to write a sctipt that would convert data
from a
Netscape DS, sync'ed from NT into a form that would be compatible with FDS
and AD.
--
Fedora-directory-users mailing list
Fedora-directory-users@xxxxxxxxxx
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-directory-users
