[CentOS] Re: Fix passwd/shadow/group files? -- network architecture is always piecemeal

[Bryan J. Smith]

From:  Dag Wieers 
> Bryan, and you're still belittling people in discussions and get into long 
> arguments as a result. Pretty please stop doing that.

I apologize for any belittling.
It is not my intent, but I do see a repeat theme.
People thing in single products/projects, not breaking down things into their multiple technologies.

That's all I meant by "artificially limiting."

> Even if you think you're right, leave some room for the
> possibility you're not.

It has nothing to do with right/wrong.
There is just this farce out there that you must have ADS or every native Windows Server 2003 interface to have quality Windows client management.
Various teams, including Samba, have done a wonderful job of reverse engineering many.

But the reality is that if you can avoid deploying services that require MS' sprawling (and sometimes self-incomaptible) schema,
then you don't need native MS ADS DCs.
Enterprises do it all-the-time.

> People always need some room in arguments,
> unless you want to corner them.
> And I'm sure that's not your intent anyway.

I _did_ ask the questions, what is ...
- ADS?
- MS (schema) LDAP?

It goes to the heart of the viewpoints and dicussion.
Especially for components that are not Samba, but most people only look at for _limited_ Samba use.
E.g., MS Kerberos _only_ for authentication of Samba as a member server in a MS ADS DC controller domain (NOT ;-).
UNIX/Linux Kerberos servers can do _far_more_ than that, even for 200x/XP clients.

Sometimes I think the best marketing done for Windows and Microsoft products is by UNIX/Linux people because they don't even know what  services and capabilities are actually offered by UNIX/Linux platforms - be it open source, commercial, etc...  ;->