What the hell???

[Ken Barber]

Sir, I respectfully disagree.

Samba 2.0.x is able to act as a file and print server only.  It cannot
participate in trust relationships with other domains, cannot replicate
account information to a BDC running NT Server, and cannot answer
authentication requests from trusting machines -- it can only authenticate
users for its own shares -- and is therefore not a PDC.

If you only have a single domain (or don't need trust relationships with any
other domain) and don't need to give its accounts any kind of rights or
permissions on any machines other than itself, then Samba 2.0.x will serve
you very nicely.  But it's still not a PDC.

P.S.  Great .sig!  The trouble with all the Windows-bashing jokes is that
most of them are true....

Ken Barber
Network Admin
Northwest Christian College
Eugene, Oregon USA

"WWJD" -- What Would John [Galt] Do?

> -----Original Message-----
> From: geoffrey at ticom.com [mailto:geoffrey at ticom.com]
> Sent: Thursday, September 07, 2000 10:47 AM
> To: Ken Barber
> Cc: samba-ntdom at us4.samba.org
> Subject: Re: What the hell???
> 
> 
> On Thu, Sep 07, 2000 at 08:43:54AM -0700, thus spake Ken Barber:
> 
> > You cannot possibly have Samba set up as either a BDC or a 
> PDC under 2.0.6
> > because neither that version, nor the current version 
> (2.0.7), nor the next
> > one coming out any day now, will support PDC/BDC functionality.
> 
> Actually, you are wrong here. I have two seperate Samba v2.0.6 servers
> running as PDCs for their respective networks/domains. It 
> does, indeed,
> work - has since at least 2.0.5a. Now, it is correct that 
> Samba cannot act
> as a BDC, but as PDC it does just fine.
> 
> geoffrey
> -- 
> +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> Santa Claus,
> the Tooth Fairy,
> Windows 2000 ...
> Some things you just outgrow.
> ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> 
> Key fingerprint ===> E8E2 1EC4 6640 1F9A 5A09  0DB6 FC5E BDAA 
> D9CB 6F04
> Public key available upon request.
>