|
As far
as the user limitation of NT, why, if I have 20000 students, should I have to
place them in more than a single domain? Domain structure should reflect
organization structure and resource allocation, not arbitrary or performance
limitations. NDS has been shown to scale to over a billion objects (users,
servers, printers, etc), and NT has lots of catching up to do.
The point is that NT domain system was designed to network access - and
administration.
I'm not sure it's a good thing to manage 20000 students' network
access as ONE organizational structure. Simply put, a domain should cover a
LAN, and several domains should take care of a WAN.Looking from another standpoint: as an ISP, you have tens of thousands
email accounts. But not *all* those people should logon to the LOCAL
network where the mail server is located (I know it's not really the case,
because IMail uses local NT SAM, but the limitations of this approach appear
here too, because you're putting too much people into the server's security
context).
I'm not saying NT domain is good or bad. I just don't think it
was designed for this purpose.
OTOH, Win2k Active Directory claims to do it all... :-)
Cheers,
Ricardo Freire, MCP
|
- RE: [IMail Forum] DataBase Andrew Cook
- Re: [IMail Forum] DataBase Mike Hell
- Re: [IMail Forum] DataBase Mike Hell
- RE: [IMail Forum] DataBase barry hudson
- Re: [IMail Forum] DataBase Len Conrad
- Re: [IMail Forum] DataBase Roger Weiss
- Re: [IMail Forum] DataBase Len Conrad
- Re: [IMail Forum] DataBase Ricardo Freire
- RE: [IMail Forum] DataBase Cal Frye
- RE: [IMail Forum] DataBase Ricardo Freire
- RE: [IMail Forum] DataBase Cal Frye
- Re: [IMail Forum] DataBase Vaughn Thurman
- Re: [IMail Forum] DataBase Rkeele
- Re: [IMail Forum] DataBase DeClue, Greg
