On Fri, Mar 21, 2008 at 01:01:35AM +0800, Gelsema, P (Patrick) wrote: > On Fri, March 21, 2008 00:39, Chad Perrin wrote: > > On Thu, Mar 20, 2008 at 10:50:34AM +0100, Nejc Å koberne wrote: > >> > >> So you are saying that merely setting up an OpenLDAP server with proper > >> DNS > >> configuration and Kerberos authentication could replace Microsoft AD > >> controller? > >> How about a group of controllers with all the failover features? Group > >> policies? > >> Are you sure you could do that just with a "bit of tweaking"? If there > >> are > >> Microsoft > >> specific features, than FreeBSD can't do anything Windows server does > >> and > >> more. I > >> am really skeptic about joining a Vista into such a domain. I would > >> really > >> love to > >> see ONE guy who achieves that. To _completely_ replace Windows server > >> with > >> all its > >> features with FreeBSD Anyone? > > > > Full AD parity is expected with the release of Samba 4: > > > > http://articles.techrepublic.com.com/5100-1035-6053709.html > > > > WINS capability is already available in ports with the samba4wins port, > > by the way. > > > > WINS is required mostly for Browsing networks, Master browser selection > and Netbios connections (the infamous 13x ports). However Microsoft is > really trying to get rid of Netbios connections and only have made it > available for backwards compatibility. If I aint mistaken port used for > file connections is somewhere in the 400 range. > > It is definitely not required for a full Windows Domain and for file-sharing.
True. I'm just not sure how that's particularly relevant to what I said. > > > In addition to that, as I pointed out in another email, FreeBSD can > > *easily* provide all the same functionality -- though MS Windows clients > > may not support all the necessary protocols and client applications > > needed to take full advantage of that functionality in some cases. In > > fact, FreeBSD supports software that does a far better job of being a > > server or client in an MS Windows network than MS Windows does of being a > > server or client in a BSD Unix network. > > <snap></snap> I'm sorry . . . does that mean anything? You've lost me. > > > >> The most important thing: we are talking about ordinary users not a > >> bunch of > >> math professors who want to run every application from a shell. And > >> those > >> users > >> want to use things nicely. For example, let's look at the mail system. > >> You > >> could > >> put a Postfix+amavisd-new+spamassassin+Horde+postfixadmin+ ... bla bla > >> stuff on > >> your FreeBSD server (I actually run this on many servers). But in that > >> webmail, > >> you are not able to manage your spam quarantine for example - you have > >> to > >> logout > >> of Horde and login to Maia Mailguard (before you have to install that > >> too), > >> which > >> is complicated for users. The problem of "mail" is then cut to so many > >> little > >> pieces that it may affect user efficiency. The problem with > >> concatenating > >> so many > >> opensource products is that it is hard to make them work together like a > >> charm. > >> Microsoft usually (!) provides that (naturally, because it produces all > >> those > >> pieces). > > > > You don't have to run everything from a shell with FreeBSD. What do you > > think this is -- 1994? Even manpages can be accessed with a GUI > > application. > > > > Microsoft does *not* provide everything people need. When someone uses a > > piece of software that isn't produced by Microsoft, chances are good that > > any MS software will have been designed specifically to make it difficult > > to interoperate. Meanwhile, a lot of open source software interoperates > > very well. Sure, if you limit yourself to nothing but MS software, you > > might get really good integration -- but that's at the cost of reduced > > security (thanks to lack of privilege separation and the ubiquitous use > > of IE's rendering engine for pretty much every single application > > Microsoft produces) and refusing to use a lot of software that Microsoft > > doesn't offer. > > > > I find it really hard to change, finetune settings on windows. Changing > default ports eg. The standard tools provided are limited and there is no > default. THink about netsh and net commands. Funny . . . I don't seem to have these problems. Have you asked for help here? > > Also security wise. You need to give more permissions to an account to do > something than you should on Freebsd. Chrooted applications for instance. Say what? . . . as opposed to MS Windows, where about 50% of what someone needs to do on a given day requires escalation to administrative permissions? > >> > >> I really am a FreeBSD guy, I run it for more than 6 years now and I like > >> it > >> a lot. > >> But I learned to be reasonable and not to say that it is in every way > >> superior to > >> everything else in the world. > > > > When did anyone say that FreeBSD was "in every way superior to everything > > else in the world"? You must be reading a different discussion than the > > one I've been reading. > > > > My point exactly. . . . You lost me again. > > >> > >> Still just talking, not fighting. > > > > I'm just offering a perspective and asking a couple of questions. > > Thanks for your insight. I have been spending a bit more time on this > topic than I normally would on a topic. It is really that I dont have the > time otherwise I would have tried to work out to replace all the > functionalities provided by MS with Freebsd ones. It took me a while to get around to replacing all my MS Windows functionality with Linux functionality -- but it just sorta happened, naturally and without real effort, over time. I found myself using Debian GNU/Linux more and more, and using MS Windows less and less. The migration from Debian to FreeBSD was pretty much an overnight affair. I got a new laptop, installed FreeBSD on it, and haven't had to look back since. Everything I need it to do so far it does as well or better, with the exception of support for Flash newer than version 7 -- and, really, that's not a big deal at this time. -- CCD CopyWrite Chad Perrin [ http://ccd.apotheon.org ] Kent Beck: "I always knew that one day Smalltalk would replace Java. I just didn't know it would be called Ruby." _______________________________________________ email@example.com mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"