-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1
Peter Nyberg �rta: | Quoting G�mes G�za <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: | | |>-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- |>Hash: SHA1 |> |>Peter Nyberg �rta: |>| Hi! |>| How do I configure smb.conf and/or Pam as a single sign on server if I |>have a |>| LDAP server with a Kerberos as password backend through gssapi? |>| I only see either Samba/ldap as PDC or Samba/kerberos with ads on the |>Internet. |>| Not both at the same time? |>| I've already configured samba with LDAP and Kerberos support. |>Everything seams |>| to works. I also configured Samba with ads and Pam support if needed? |>| |>Unfortunatelly not yet. |>Windows clients need an MSPAC in their Kerberos tickets, and as usual |>with M$ "inventions" they keep thats a trade secret, so currently only |>AD Kerberos servers can do that. |>However you can have a Heimdal Kerberos server (current snapshots) with |>LDAP backend authenticate your UNIX users against NT password hashes. |>For more info you can search the Heimdal or the Samba-technical mailing |>lists. |> |>Cheers |> |>Geza | | | In that case one miss the whole point with Kerberos accept for UNIX and Mac OS X. | Today I have 60 different UNIX, 45 Macintosh classic, 15 Macintosh OS X and 150 | Windows 98/ME/NT/2000/XP. Maybe it's better to use ldap only until they have a | fully Kerberized solution, or whats you opinion? | | Currently you can see the benefits from Kerberos only at UNIX (MacOsX is also *NIX) hosts :-( . It is up to you to use that advantage, or stick with an LDAP only (still very good) solution.
Cheers
Geza -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.2.3 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org
iD8DBQFAdCW3/PxuIn+i1pIRAvXUAKCU1XU0Z6883qL2G11JGkoQ5WpW+QCfazK6 Hc9PI2X5tiJE5WTAek45lD0= =uwfl -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
-- To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the instructions: http://lists.samba.org/mailman/listinfo/samba
