|
We will have to carry this discussion on at the Summit with
beers. Probably in the bar at the Ren., we will grab Dean and everyone else that
shows up who can put two words together and form the sentence "draft please".
Working as a consultant at a company that is trying to work
with IBM though I won't say be a partner, let me say IBM still doesn't seem
to have much of a clue. Their hardware sucks (345/360 series are overpriced,
about 10 years seemingly behind the times and have failure rates only seen in
nightmares), Tivoli still sucks, and the people we have talked to seem to have a
real cursory understanding of Windows. Tough to beat a
competitor you don't understand. I also think it will be a long while before
Linux is ready to take out AIX and even longer before IBM dumps AIX. As for the
big bad IBM hardware, a pretty comprehensive study was done within the
company of it by a friend of mine and he was telling me the results way back
when and they found that not only is it more expensive to collapse a server
farm and run Linux on those machines it is WAY more expensive.
I also have choice words about EMC (now and almost always)
but I try to keep my gripes to one vendor per post. Lets just say if you talk to
someone from EMC and they tell you that the Celerra does everything
a Windows server will do and better, laugh at them.
joe
I
completely agree, pretty much across the board.
Part
of Novell's original demise, IMO, was that the were not a single source solution
- you went to them for the servers and someone else for the 50-100x more
clients. Their recent moves lead me to believe that they might have finally
figured out that little pearl of wisdom. However, based on a recent interview I
read with their CEO, I think they're still a bit in the dark - he basically said
that they now have the same code base across all platforms. "Not even Microsoft
has that." Oh really? Windows 2000 anyone?
Seriously, though, Novell isn't going to make Linux mainstream, they
simply don't have sufficient traction in any market to influence more than a
smattering of buyers. IBM will be the company to take Linux mainstream - when
they drop AIX in favor of Linux. Don't think it will happen? Think again. Today,
Linux can run on EVERY hardware line IBM sells - including the zSeries
mainframes and the iSeries midrange boxes. And let's face it, few companies who
aren't already in bed with IBM actually go buy AIX.
There's a quote I've read in someone's email sig that succinctly
describes my position - "Linux is for people who hate Microsoft. BSD is for
people who love Unix"
Roger
--------------------------------------------------------------
Roger D. Seielstad -
MTS MCSE MS-MVP
Sr. Systems Administrator
Inovis Inc.
NOD. Let them go down that road. It is a learning curve.
I don't expect Lunix (mispell intended :oP ) to learn from the mistakes made
by MS. It is simply at the point now where NT4 or 3.5 were way back when it
was the unhackable unbeatable unbreakable uncrashable new Kid OS running
around. In order for them to get the mass appeal in the home they have to make
it very simple to install just like MS did it which means starting up all the
common stuff automatically. Unfortunately the help for the regular joe (in my
opinion) is not quite as easy when that automated method blows up because you
have to start asking what dist what kernel what this what that, etc. With
Windows it was simply what version, oh ok, do this.
I think the last thing most of the hard core Linux people
truly want is for it to become mainstream. It will evolve from what they liked
about it. It won't be cool anymore.
I am really curious to see what Novell will do with its
recent purchases. If they port NDS MS might actually have a serious contender
coming up for knocking down AD. The one thing is I never saw a really large
NDS deployment so I am curious how well their replication engine will stand
up. From my experiences AD's replication engine kicks the snot out of
iPlanet's LDAP server. We had a large data population for Exchange 2000 which
involved some 80 or so attributes for each of some 200k users in my AD spread
across some 400 DCs around the world and one time stamp update for all of
the same users in our iPlanet directory composed of 5 big bad Solaris boxes
within 10 feet of each other. The iPlanet directory said uncle before we did
when we were slowly cranking up the import speed. Their replication started
really messing them up and we were just above idle.
joe
Various Linux distro's have already gone down the wrong rode, IMO. Many
of them are using the install too much by default concept to make it easier -
which is exactly what Microsoft is backing away from with Win2k3 and
presumably Longhorn.
Its
one of the reasons that my preferred free Unix is still OpenBSD (and FreeBSD a
close second) - just about everything is off by default, requiring conscious
action by the admin to enable most of the things that could harm
them.
Roger
--------------------------------------------------------------
Roger D. Seielstad
- MTS MCSE MS-MVP
Sr. Systems Administrator
Inovis Inc.
Should be
interesting to watch Linux in the next couple of years... as KDE and Gnome
are really starting to resemble some other OS that slips my mind, and lots
of GUI interfaces to configure things, and well just making it real easy for
some of those displaced less-qualified admins to put Linux on their
resume... used to be you could fake it with Windows but had to know what you
were doing with Linux. Even though NT4 was perhaps too easy to run
setup and see what happens and wow instant datacenter, it certainly did a
lot to increase MS' market share.
DNS is not hard...
once you figure it out. Remember trying to figure out subnet masks?
Once you figure out TCP/IP and routing, it seems easy. But I
remember it being way over my head once. Ditto DNS, although the
wizards help you get in over your head quickly and not know it until it
breaks - that's when you learn. Maybe soon MCSE tests will have broken
AD or DR scenarios, where you can even pull up Google to research the answer
and you have to fix the problem. Would that be too close to real
life?? Or too much like the CCIE lab? J
Rich
From: Roger
Seielstad [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, February 09, 2004 10:19
AM
To:
'[EMAIL PROTECTED]'
Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] DNS SOA
entered incorrectly during installation
DNS isn't *that*
hard to understand.
And I'm on record
saying that the biggest mistake Microsoft made with Windows NT4 was making
the GUI too close to Win95's - made it way too easy for people to fall into
the trap of thinking they're very similar, which we know they are not. And
that mentality is what led to a lot of underqualified admins making poor
choices, thereby giving NT4 the bad rep it got. (Ok - maybe part of the
reason)
--------------------------------------------------------------
Roger D. Seielstad
- MTS MCSE MS-MVP
Sr.
Systems Administrator
Inovis
Inc.
-----Original
Message-----
From: Rich
Milburn [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, February 09, 2004 11:11
AM
To:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] DNS SOA
entered incorrectly during installation
Makes sense -
although seems like if it did the default domain suffix it would save some
newbies a few hours or days... then again, nah leave it as is, job
security! LOL
The first couple
of times I spent a long time trying to figure this out and kept going back
to the install DNS with DCPROMO option. I found the SOA problem by
accident (by reading the dialog, funny how that helps
sometimes)
Rich
From:
Roger Seielstad [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, February 09, 2004 9:07
AM
To:
'[EMAIL PROTECTED]'
Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] DNS SOA
entered incorrectly during installation
The SOA doesn't
have to exist in the domain in question. Put another way, the SOA for
domain.com doesn't have to be soa.domain.com, it could be
soa.someotherdomain.com
For instance,
look at my company's primary domain (inovis.com) -
bash-2.04$ dig
in soa inovis.com
;
<<>> DiG 9.1.2 <<>> in soa inovis.com
;; global
options: printcmd
;; Got answer:
;; ->>HEADER<<-
opcode: QUERY, status: NOERROR, id: 39141
;; flags: qr rd ra; QUERY: 1,
ANSWER: 1, AUTHORITY: 0, ADDITIONAL: 0
;; QUESTION
SECTION:
;inovis.com.
IN SOA
;; ANSWER
SECTION:
inovis.com.
1800 IN
SOA ns1.inovisinc.net. hostmaster.inovisinc.net.
2003121401 1800 600 604800 1800
The SOA record
for inovis.com lives in inovisinc.net. Therefore, it doesn't necessarily
make sense for the SOA to automatically populate with the suffix of the
domain in which it exists.
--------------------------------------------------------------
Roger D.
Seielstad - MTS MCSE MS-MVP
Sr.
Systems Administrator
Inovis
Inc.
-----Original
Message-----
From: Rich
Milburn [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, February 09, 2004
9:34 AM
To:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: [ActiveDir] DNS SOA
entered incorrectly during installation
It's possible
I've seen this behavior because I'm doing something wrong, but I think
it might be a bug? Anyway, whenever I've set up DNS separately
from DCPROMO, set up my forward and reverse zones, then pointed my
soon-to-be DC at it and run DCPROMO, it tells me the DNS could not be
found or does not accept dynamic registrations. So when I go back
onto the DNS to check what I did wrong, I find that I have to go into
the SOA record and add the domain name (to make it a FQDN and not just a
host name). Voila, it works. So the question is, if the SOA
is created automatically, and it knows the domain name (because it is
the SOA record for that domain's zone, duh!), shouldn't it write the
FQDN there or assume if the domain suffix is not specified that it
should tack on it's own domain name just like it does for any of the
other records? Or am I missing something?
Thanks
Rich
-------APPLEBEE'S
INTERNATIONAL, INC. CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE------- PRIVILEGED /
CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION may be contained in this message or any
attachments. This information is strictly confidential and may be
subject to attorney-client privilege. This message is intended only for
the use of the named addressee. If you are not the intended recipient of
this message, unauthorized forwarding, printing, copying, distribution,
or using such information is strictly prohibited and may be unlawful. If
you have received this in error, you should kindly notify the sender by
reply e-mail and immediately destroy this message. Unauthorized
interception of this e-mail is a violation of federal criminal law.
Applebee's International, Inc. reserves the right to monitor and review
the content of all messages sent to and from this e-mail address.
Messages sent to or from this e-mail address may be stored on the
Applebee's International, Inc. e-mail system.
-------APPLEBEE'S
INTERNATIONAL, INC. CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE------- PRIVILEGED /
CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION may be contained in this message or any
attachments. This information is strictly confidential and may be
subject to attorney-client privilege. This message is intended only for
the use of the named addressee. If you are not the intended recipient of
this message, unauthorized forwarding, printing, copying, distribution,
or using such information is strictly prohibited and may be unlawful. If
you have received this in error, you should kindly notify the sender by
reply e-mail and immediately destroy this message. Unauthorized
interception of this e-mail is a violation of federal criminal law.
Applebee's International, Inc. reserves the right to monitor and review
the content of all messages sent to and from this e-mail address.
Messages sent to or from this e-mail address may be stored on the
Applebee's International, Inc. e-mail
system.
-------APPLEBEE'S
INTERNATIONAL, INC. CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE------- PRIVILEGED /
CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION may be contained in this message or any
attachments. This information is strictly confidential and may be subject
to attorney-client privilege. This message is intended only for the use of
the named addressee. If you are not the intended recipient of this
message, unauthorized forwarding, printing, copying, distribution, or
using such information is strictly prohibited and may be unlawful. If you
have received this in error, you should kindly notify the sender by reply
e-mail and immediately destroy this message. Unauthorized interception of
this e-mail is a violation of federal criminal law. Applebee's
International, Inc. reserves the right to monitor and review the content
of all messages sent to and from this e-mail address. Messages sent to or
from this e-mail address may be stored on the Applebee's International,
Inc. e-mail system.
-------APPLEBEE'S INTERNATIONAL, INC.
CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE------- PRIVILEGED / CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION may be
contained in this message or any attachments. This information is strictly
confidential and may be subject to attorney-client privilege. This message
is intended only for the use of the named addressee. If you are not the
intended recipient of this message, unauthorized forwarding, printing,
copying, distribution, or using such information is strictly prohibited and
may be unlawful. If you have received this in error, you should kindly
notify the sender by reply e-mail and immediately destroy this message.
Unauthorized interception of this e-mail is a violation of federal criminal
law. Applebee's International, Inc. reserves the right to monitor and review
the content of all messages sent to and from this e-mail address. Messages
sent to or from this e-mail address may be stored on the Applebee's
International, Inc. e-mail system.
|
