Seemingly an incredibly mundane thread that probably would have drawn some flames in earlier times. [My hasn't this list gotten civil lately.]
Isn't it odd that just as we are getting pretty far along with the elimination of WINS, that we are also well along in beginning to recognize that we need to reinvent it?! Name resolution is a curious thing. You send a name resolution service a name that is structured within the rules of some system (probably overlaid with a private taxonomy of some sort), and it returns an address (relative or fully qualified - as networks seldom care so long as it works). WINS had this interesting attribute of being somewhat independent of the underlying network addressing system, so it could resolve TCP/IP, SPX/IPX or even NetBIOS addresses. It also played a role in some networks for mapping either or both SPX/IPX or NetBIOS over IP. Of course one of the problems with this flexibility, is that it allowed names that were not copasetic with DNS, and thus got in the way of moving us toward full TCP/IP interoperability the way we need to. So here we are, fully planted in a DNS world (well most of us are), and we are finding that there are things beyond DNS and TCP/IP with which we are having some 'issues.' It shows up most in the VoIP world where a fusion with SS7 and other telephony systems is a requirement. But there are also those pesky 'Inbox Assistant' items that are 'missing.' So how do you get an LDAP query (hidden behind an Inbox Assistant script of course) to return the IP address currently assigned to the MAC address on the device where I was last fully authenticated so a notification of some sort (say something like "one ringy dingy . . .") can be sent? One thing for sure, DNS isn't going to help, and LDAP is just a an access protocol, not an information model. Sad, because people were so fond of LDAP, and yet it didn't solve all that much and probably wasn't all that important in the greater scheme of things. John Strassner over at Intelliden (used to be a fellow at Cisco) has been working on these kinds of problem (from the 'other side') for a long time. John's work tackles the problems that DNS does not support from the perspective of network management, but the missing application functionality leads to the same place. We are at best, in a very very primitive world relative to the evolution of directories and name services. We have a long way to go. -----Original Message----- From: Williams Scott CTR [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, July 18, 2002 9:25 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Question What about WINS? -----Original Message----- From: Chris Scharff [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, July 18, 2002 11:57 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Question Yes. AD provides authentication to Exchange 5.5, Exchange 5.5 doesn't know or care about the mode in which AD is running. > -----Original Message----- > From: Williams Scott CTR [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Thursday, July 18, 2002 10:53 AM > To: Exchange Discussions > Subject: Question > > Will an Exchange 5.5 ORG work in a NATIVE Windows 2000 Active Directory > structure? If so how? If not why? _________________________________________________________________ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin: [EMAIL PROTECTED] _________________________________________________________________ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin: [EMAIL PROTECTED] _________________________________________________________________ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
