[Samba] Help: justification for Linux PDC vs Windows...
onephatcat at earthlink.net
Fri Apr 11 17:38:19 GMT 2008
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.
More information about the samba