Migration Documentation

Sun May 6 10:51:45 GMT 2001

Well, I didn't spell it out, but Novell 5.1 with NDS 8.5 (now called
85.0) is a very fine LDAP server which outperforms OpenLDAP in many
aspects and has scalability features only dreamt about in OpenLDAP (plus
the commercial support ...).

Samba is great and the simple reason that the documentation is lacking is
that with the scarce manpower the samba team has they prefer to develop
samba and write the absolute minimum of docs (and actually also the
mailing lists are part of the docs). I support this attitude and maybe you
can give resources to the samba team to write docs, after all it's an open
source community project ...

But we are now really off-topic and I don't see what there is left to
discuss about (Novell/Samba/Windows/Linux) ?

Sincerely,
Schlomo

 On Sun, 6 May 2001, Tim Robison wrote:

> What it really comes down to is this:
> If you have SAMBA running, with NOVELL, you dont need NT/2000.You can use
> open office(or its equivalent) to read and write Office files, Xwindows on
> the desktop or GNOME or KDE...what ever, and you really dont need a windows
> based server product.You can use NFS accross the network along with SAMBA
> based shares.Lets face it, Windows NT/2000 server product is expensive to
> install, unreliable, expensive to scale, and unstable. In general, 2000 is
> bettern than NT, and Whistler, or what ever it being beta tested under now
> is better than 2000.Then only real issue I have with any LINUX based
> anything is the documentation.While the LDP is making a dent in this
> problem, there are still vast improvemnts needed.I believe the SAMBA
> documentation has also vastly improved, but it still needs a better cookbook
> type approach.It should have a step by step guide to accomplish the
> general setup, then a step by step guide to set it up as a PDC, then one for
> the BDC, then one for integrating into a Windows Network, then one for
> Integrating into a Novell Network.While I have not checked the site in the
> last 30 days, I do not beleive it has these items in it.
> 
> The SAMBA team has done marvelous work, and I hope they keep it up. If you
> really want to make a real splash, create hooks into samba for OPEN LDAP.I
> see a day coming soon when most businesses will question the need for the MS
> platform other than at the desktop.
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Schlomo Schapiro" <schapiro at clerk.pi.huji.ac.il>
> To: "Nicholas Brealey" <nick at brealey.org>
> Cc: <samba-ntdom at lists.samba.org>
> Sent: Sunday, May 06, 2001 3:02 AM
> Subject: Re: Migration Documentation
> 
> 
> > Hi,
> >
> > I hope the samba guys are not upset about this topic ...
> >
> > Anyway, don't do things you don't KNOW ! E.g. if you know Windows, then do
> > Windows. If you know Novell, then don't.
> >
> > Besides that, if you don't have any enterprise level management needs
> > (e.g. only few people in one department) or don't want strong management
> > of the desktop, then you really don't need Novell.
> >
> > OTOH, if you need a directory-based authentication backbone with
> > excellent Windows Client integration and proven high security, then there
> > arenot so many alternatives to Novell, especially when it comes to
> > stability and support and performance.
> >
> > And, NW6 will support CIFS and to do roaming profiles you might need
> > Zenworks (for Novell).
> >
> > And, don't try to save money at the wrongplace !
> >
> > Schlomo
> >
> > PS: Does anybody from the samba side know anything about CIFS on NetWare ?
> >
> >
> > On Sat, 5 May 2001, Nicholas Brealey wrote:
> >
> > > Schlomo Schapiro wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Hi,
> > > >
> > > > you could mount the netware serverunder linux and read out the
> trustees
> > > > (with nwtrustee2 from ncpfs) and set them on the linux box.
> > > >
> > > > But why would you want to make such a switch ? Netware is much
> betteras
> > > > fileserver and has a much better Windows integration and also a Linux
> > > > client now.
> > > >
> > > > Schlomo
> > > >
> > >
> > > Hello
> > >
> > > This is probably off-topic but I am intrested in discussing Samba vs
> > > Netware.
> > >
> > > I don't really know what Netware is capable of. I have a Netware server
> > > which
> > > was setup (not by me) for Windows 95/98 clients and we have added
> > > Windows
> > > NT/2000 clients. We also have a Sun server running Samba 2.2 as a PDC
> > > and
> > > an number of workstations running Solaris, IRIX and Linux.
> > >
> > > This is the list of things I don't like about Netware in my set up. They
> > > really
> > > all relate to Windows NT/2000 and are perhaps to do with out setup. I
> > > would
> > > love to be corrected if I am wrong (which I probably am).
> > >
> > > 1) Logging inis complicated and anoying. Ihave the Netware client
> > > installed.
> > > The user is presented with a window where they type their user name and
> > > password.
> > > This window has a check box for 'workstation only' which is misnamed -
> > > it actually
> > > means 'don't login to Netware'. There is also an Advanced button and a
> > > Windows NT/2000
> > > tab where the user can set their Microsoft user name and choose to login
> > > in to the
> > > Microsoft domain or the local workstation. A very annoying feature of
> > > this dialogue
> > > is that the Microsoft user name does not default to the Netware user
> > > name. If more than
> > > one user uses a machine at least one of them has to type in their
> > > username twice
> > > even if their Netware and Microsoft user names are the same. If the
> > > Microsoft and Netware
> > > usernames and password are the same and the Micrsoft user name has been
> > > left at the
> > > correct name after the last use, then things go smoothly, if this is not
> > > the case a
> > >second login dialogue is displayed for Microsoft Networking.
> > >
> > > 2) Installing the Netware client correctly is extrawork. If you use
> > > Microsoft
> > > Networking you need to install the Netware client with IP only and make
> > > sure
> > > that Microsoft Networking is higher priority than Netware. If you don't
> > > do a custom
> > > install of the client then you get slow performance, see
> > > http://www.ithowto.com/novell/clientspeed.htm for details.
> > >
> > > 3) Users can only share directories ontheir drives using CIFS so
> > > they have to have Microsoft Networking installed - having Netware as
> > > well just
> > > makes life more complicated.
> > >
> > > 4) Users can change ACLs on files on Samba shares in (almost) the same
> > > way as
> > > they change ACLs on files on local disks. I don't know how to restrict
> > > permissions
> > > on single file on a Netware share. The only time I tried it I restricted
> > > access
> > > to all files. The help button on my NT workstation gave no helpful
> > > information.
> > >
> > > 5) Windows NT/2000 roaming profiles don't work with Netware (or perhaps
> > > we don't
> > > have them enabled).
> > >
> > > 6) It seems that you need a Windows NT/2000 server to act as a gateway
> > > to integrate
> > > Netware well with Windows NT/2000 clients. If you have a Windows NT/2000
> > > server
> > > why bother with Netware server?
> > >
> > > 7) I have to have Windows NT/2000 and Unix either for the applications
> > > our users run
> > > on them or to develop software for customers to run. Why do I a want
> > > another OS,
> > > Netware, when the ones I have to have can do everything I need.
> > >
> > >
> > > Regards
> > >
> > > Nick
> > >
> >
> > --
> > Schlomo Schapiro
> > Computation Authority
> > Hebrew University of Jerusalem
> >
> > Tel: ++972 / 2/ 65-84404
> > Fax:           65-27349
> > email: schapiro at clerk.pi.huji.ac.il
> > WWW: http://shum.cc.huji.ac.il/~schapiro
> >
> >
> >
> 

-- 
Schlomo Schapiro
Computation Authority
Hebrew University of Jerusalem

Tel: ++972 / 2 / 65-84404
Fax:             65-27349
email: schapiro at clerk.pi.huji.ac.il
WWW:   http://shum.cc.huji.ac.il/~schapiro