[Samba] rid and ad backends differences

[Yanni]

Thank you Loui,

In the near future I am planning to install a second windows AD server 
for redundancy, so if one of them fails
the other one will take over. You mentioned that if I want more servers 
the AD backend is a better choice.
By "/more servers/" did you mean more samba storage servers or more DC's?

Is there going to be a problem when the time comes to install a second 
win.AD server for redundancy?
I am thinking of 3 servers. 2 running windows AD and 1 samba storage 
server. That's it, no more.

Many thanks for your help
Yanni

On 06/05/15 08:12, L.P.H. van Belle wrote:
>> so I think ADS is not the best option in my case.
>>  From your explanation I'm in favour of RID backend as it seems more
>> stable because of the static setup.
>
> Your best options is : Use ADS, with backend RID.
>
> If you have 1 DC and (or 1 extra member server )
> than RID is you best option, no hassle uid/gid and RFC2307 things..
> but beware if  you do things on linux.. than you can need uid/gids..
> 1 example, you cant share the user homedirs on differented server with rid..
> because the by rid generated uid/gid wil be different per server.
>
> If you want to use more server, then we advice you to use the AD backend.
>
>
> Gr.
>
> Louis
>
>
>
>> -----Oorspronkelijk bericht-----
>> Van: y.goudetsidis at mail.cryst.bbk.ac.uk
>> [mailto:samba-bounces at lists.samba.org] Namens Yanni
>> Verzonden: dinsdag 5 mei 2015 11:55
>> Aan: Marc Muehlfeld; samba at lists.samba.org
>> Onderwerp: [Samba] rid and ad backends differences
>>
>> Hi Marc
>>
>> Thank you. I now understand the difference.
>> My plan is to create a samba file server in order to store
>> user profiles
>> and also keep things as simple as possible.
>> I will not have users logging into different servers with different
>> shells. , so I think ADS is not the best option in my case.
>>  From your explanation I'm in favour of RID backend as it seems more
>> stable because of the static setup.
>>
>> Rowland thank you also for your reply.
>> Yanni
>>
>>
>> On 04/05/15 19:23, Marc Muehlfeld wrote:
>>> Hello Yanni,
>>>
>>> Am 30.04.2015 um 15:52 schrieb Yanni:
>>>> Can someone please explain what is the difference between
>> the rid and ad
>>>> backends in smb.conf?
>>> Rowland already gave some information.
>>>
>>>
>>> Just an advantage, that makes me like RFC2307 more than RID backend:
>>> RFC2307 allows you to define homeDirectory and shells per
>> user central
>>> in AD. This means you have /bin/ksh, because you like it,
>> your collegue
>>> has /bin/bash, your boss /bin/csh and all other users
>> /bin/nologin. If
>>> you use RID backend, then you can only have one shell for
>> users on each>> server (see smb.conf: template shell) and you have to ensure on other
>>> ways, that e. g. normal users can't login via SSH.
>>> RFC2307 is a bit more administration work during user creation, but
>>> makes life more flexible later, while RID backend doesn't require
>>> anything else than to define it once in your smb.conf, but is more
>>> static with per server defined values.
>>>
>>>
>>> Regards,
>>> Marc
>> -- 
>> To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the
>> instructions:  https://lists.samba.org/mailman/options/samba
>>
>>