QNAP appliances can be integrated in AD and it works well. You basically add it
to your domain as
you would a Windows PC. Then you can set up permissions for the shares you
define on the NAS using
AD groups and/or users.
I have one in use at a small business since 2 years (model TS-459U-SP+). It is
a domain member and
the only problem I had with it was due to a power loss. I would definitively
recommend having it
connected to a UPS (which is now the case at this customer).
It is used as a secondary file server and is accessed from Windows PCs, in the
same way the main SBS
2008 file server is accessed. From an end user perspective, it works exactly
the same. So SMB is
working fine.
The web UI is easy to use and no Linux knowledge is needed. Everything can be
configured from the
web UI and you do not need to configure Samba manually.
They now have SMB 2.0 available on their new QTS OS 4.0. I have no experience
with it yet, but will
have soon.
I'm also using one at my home office, since more than 3 years and had no
problem with it. However it
is not AD integrated.
I can recommend it for the use you describe.
JCC
On 28.10.2013 19:06, Ben Scott wrote:
> SHORT VERSION
>
> Anyone here used the QNAP appliances as an SMB file server ("Windows
> File Sharing") in an Active Directory environment? How'd it go?
>
> (Not as an iSCSI target or other block-level protocol.)
>
> LONG VERSION
>
> I'm looking for what will basically be a network-attached disk
> drive. Non-critical file storage for things like ISO images, hard
> disk images, archives of old user files, installation sources, that
> sort of thing. SMB will be the protocol. Clients will be Win 7, XP,
> and that one Win 2000 computer I just can't get rid of. Permissions
> will be pretty simple, basically a couple of groups,
> read-only/read-write/none, pull from and authenticate to our Active
> Directory. No interest in running any applications on the box, nor
> doing anything more than file copies to/from it. We're not going to
> be running application off it (unless you count installers). No block
> level protocols like iSATA, ATA-over-Ethernet, etc. Hardware will be
> twin mirrored 4TB disks, maybe a third sometimes gets attached to make
> an offline backup. Rack mount.
>
> One option would be a Dell R210-II running CentOS Linux, Linux
> kernel software RAID, Samba, etc. I've done that before. It works.
>
> But management here is concerned that good Linux people are harder
> to find than Windows people. They don't like that my minions don't
> have expertise with such systems. So I'm considering something that
> comes with a bit more hand-holding, a bit more "ready-to-go,
> out-of-the-box". And NAS hardware can be cheaper than general-purpose
> server hardware.
>
> Specifically, I'm looking at the QNAP TS-412U. Four bays, what
> looks like a decent web UI, claims to do Active Directory integration.
> All sorts of flashy bells and whistles we'll never use, but oh well.
> It's significantly cheaper than most rack-mount general-purpose
> servers will be. But if their SMB stuff is borken (I presume they're
> using Samba, but how you configure Samba matters a lot), it's no good
> to me.
>
> Thoughts/suggestions/experiences/etc. welcomed.
>
> -- Ben
>
>
>
