> I attended the Samba conference at the FOSDEM yesterday. Jeremy Allison was > great, and explained very clearly the problems faced by implementing an > Active Directory controller. > The CIFS protocol is required in heterogenous environments. Jeremy made it > pretty clear that even in pure Unix environments, CIFS is quite superior to > NFSv4. Samba is thus a required component of pretty much any network, even > when using Unix workstations and servers only. > Implementing a Samba Active Directory domain controller requires more > components than for an NT4 domain controller. Samba will have to integrate an > LDAP server, a Kerberos server, a DNS server and a DHCP server. It will have > to implement remote registry access and many Windows-related DCE/RPC calls. > Those don't make much sense in Unix-only environments. Moreover, the LDAP > directory schema will have to match the Microsoft AD schema, which is badly > documented to say the least. > I'm concerned about all the unneeded features that will be introduced by > Samba4 in pure Unix environments, as well as by the implications that Samba4 > will have on other services. The LDAP directory will have to implement the > Microsoft AD schema, which is not compatible with any current Unix > application. How will Samba4 interoperate with groupware softwares for > instance ? Has anyone thought about how to mix Unix LDAP-aware applications > with Samba4 ? Aren't we pushing bloated, buggy and badly thought > Microsoft "standards" to the Unix platform in the name of interoperability > without thinking about the consequences this will have on other services and > on the overall stability ? > Thanks in advance to all of those who will prove me wrong and let me sleep > peacefully again :-)
http://wiki.samba.org/index.php/Samba4/LDAP_Backend -- To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the instructions: https://lists.samba.org/mailman/listinfo/samba
