If they insist on the attribute route, I sort of like this answer!  You can
add and remove instances of ADAM for apps that get deployed, and your
internal AD stays clean.

It's also a really nice answer for apps that may be deployed outside your
internal network (if that was the goal - as someone else guessed)

Having said that, I'm not a huge fan of deploying multiple directory systems
for application deployment unless there is a really good reason.  It either
increases administrative overhead for someone, or adds to your
infrastructure if you deploy a method of syncronizing the directory
membership.  Or both ;)

When your devs tell you it's slower to query the group membership, can they
tell you ~how much~ slower?  And how fast they are looking for?  Maybe it's
a tweaking issue?


On 10/19/04 12:48 PM, "Renouf, Phil" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> Any thought of using ADAM as the authentication source for these
> applications? That gives you a lot more flexibility for how you
> authenticate the users and gives you the ability to make changes to the
> schema without effecting your AD implementation. If you go that route I
> would suggest using LDAP over SSL for communication between the app
> servers and ADAM (a good idea even if you keep using AD).
> 
> Phil 
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Creamer, Mark
> Sent: Tuesday, October 19, 2004 9:21 AM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: [ActiveDir] groups vs attributes
> 
> As our developers (as well as our 3rd party vendors) continue to create
> apps that leverage AD, the question comes up frequently - which is a
> better solution...to search AD for a group membership, or for the value
> of a given attribute, when validating a user's access to a custom
> application?
> 
> Our "standard" has been to use universal groups for this sort of thing,
> that is, UserA can access the application, if he is a member of the
> appropriate universal group. However, our developers have discovered in
> their ad hoc queries that returning a list of users that have a given
> value assigned to a custom attribute is much faster that returning a
> list of users that are members of a universal group. So they are asking,
> shouldn't we be adding a custom attribute when an application requires a
> validation that a user can access the application, rather than using a
> group membership?
> 
> Any notes from the field would be much appreciated!
> 
> Mark Creamer
> 
> Systems Engineer
> 
> Cintas Corporation
> 
> The Service Professionals
> 
> List info   : http://www.activedir.org/mail_list.htm
> List FAQ    : http://www.activedir.org/list_faq.htm
> List archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/activedir%40mail.activedir.org/

List info   : http://www.activedir.org/mail_list.htm
List FAQ    : http://www.activedir.org/list_faq.htm
List archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/activedir%40mail.activedir.org/

Reply via email to