Yan Seiner wrote:
Greg J. Zartman, P.E.
Fact is, most of us don't have farms of domain controllers and hundreds
and hundreds of users. Most of us manage small to medium sized networks
that can benefit hugely by the cost savings of deploying Samba instead
of Windows. I'm not talking about just costs of software licenses; but
cost of hardware, sys admin staff, and down time.
Yup. For small-ish networks, nt4 servers are 'good enough'.
Last I checked, MS imposes an artificial limit on its servers, where a
server can only serve its own subnet. Samba doesn't have this limit. So
a single multi-homed samba server can do the work of several MS servers.
So you don't need AD with samba as much since everything is on one server
anyway whereas with MS you need multiple servers and all the management
overhead that entails.
I could be wrong on this; it was true the last time I ripped out a bunch
of MS servers and replaced them with samba. This was some time
ago.... Anyone know if it's still a limitation?
As I understand it, you need a WINS server for every subnet - we figured
this out after the fact, so we now have 3 servers running Samba so that
everyone can see all members of the workgroup (we are rolling out the
domain slowly - in the meanwhile, we don't want to lose browse
functionality). If anyone has a written proceedure for how to get this
working with only one multi-homed server (does that mean one server with
1 network card for each subnet, or one card with 3 addresses somehow
associated with it?) please post a link or email it to me.
Thanks
- Joel
--
To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the
instructions: https://lists.samba.org/mailman/listinfo/samba
