On Wed, 2009-11-04 at 18:24 -0500, Brian Mathis wrote: > You're getting dangerously close to saying "Everything you need to > know is in the source code", or more succinctly, "RTFM an piss off". > No one is saying that people shouldn't understand how LDAP works, but > there's a world of difference between understanding how to install > LDAP or make a query, and understanding the implications of everything > you can do with it. > > Understanding LDAP has absolutely nothing to do with how to USE LDAP. > Knowing how to USE it is a people/organization problem, not a > technical one. You need to adjust your focus to a higher level > discussion than what you are having. This is not about the > implementation details, it's about the higher-level structure. > > Additionally, the fact that you have had to do things in multiple > different ways in different offices only proves the point here. Does > every application really need a completely custom structure? It might > be nice for the billable hours, but my guess is that most of those > offices could probably fit within a common schema, or at least a > common schema used as a starting point for customization. > > > P.S. If LDAP was never designed to do user auth, it doesn't matter. > Pretty much everyone uses it that way, so get over it. ---- I'm not having any problem with LDAP - it works for me. I have nothing to get over. Fedora-DS and CentOS-DS are configured by default to use a particular setup for Users and Groups. I have used both OpenLDAP and Fedora-DS and they both work fine. If you think that OpenLDAP suffers from a particular lack of 'higher level structure', then you should probably address the authors of the software (good luck). Kwan Lowe says you can install RedHat-DS (and by inference CentOS-DS) and configure server and replication in under an hour...what's everyone griping about? Craig -- This message has been scanned for viruses and dangerous content by MailScanner, and is believed to be clean.