[Samba] rid and ad backends differences

L.P.H. van Belle belle at bazuin.nl
Wed May 6 03:11:41 MDT 2015

Ok, if you planning to have more servers, think of the following. 
Are you adding other software which requere uid/gid, like mail server solutions. 
Then choose the AD backend. 
Do you want to login with a user with for example  ssh, and you want to login on all servers. 
( with for example, an nfs based users homedir )  
then the AD backend is a must, imo. 
If you use the servers only for windows, then yes, you can have RID. 
but i still prefer, the AD backend, to im flexible to move all ways in windows and linux.
It your choose. 

Van: Yanni [mailto:y.goudetsidis at mail.cryst.bbk.ac.uk] 
Verzonden: woensdag 6 mei 2015 10:57
Aan: L.P.H. van Belle
CC: samba at lists.samba.org
Onderwerp: Re: [Samba] rid and ad backends differences

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

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 

More information about the samba mailing list