samba working with win2k server.

[mcveigh]

I have a network with an exchange server and a samba server.
the exchange serer is only for internal use. it does send out email but does not receive external. (long story)
anyways
I'm thinking of making samba a PDC and removing that functionality from the exchange server (small companyy only 10 users).

I'm curious as to start this process w/o reinstalling exchange.
can anyone offer some advice or hints?

 

[lowtech1]

Using Samba, 2nd Edition
By Jay Ts, Robert Eckstein, and David Collier-Brown
2nd Edition, February 2003
O'Reilly & Associates, ISBN: 0-596-00256-4
www.oreilly.com/catalog/samba2/

Chapter 4. Windows NT Domains

 

[stash]

What version of exchange?

Is active directory involved?

 

[mcveigh]

Originally posted by: STaSh
What version of exchange?

Is active directory involved?

exchange 2k

yes the exchange server is the pdc using AD

I'm not a guru and would like to get as far away from MS as possible

 

[PELarson]

Originally posted by: mcveigh

Originally posted by: STaSh
What version of exchange?

Is active directory involved?

exchange 2k

yes the exchange server is the pdc using AD

PDC is a NT4 term that doesn't really apply too W2k servers set up as the Active Directories Domain Controller, other than the PDC emulator role.

What you want to do is impossible. Because, E2k requires an Active Directories enviroment to function and Samba doesn't yet emulate the AD Domain Controllers.

You could setup the server that is running Linux as the DNS server and remove that role/burden from the server running E2k.

 

[drag]

All in all, do you use this server for E-mail only? Or do you authenticate Windows users thru it?

A file server etc etc. What's all the functionality you want with it. do you have any plans to expand or add functionality to it in the future?

Samba is what comes up naturally when you talk about linux and windows mixing together in a enviroment.

The recent release of Samba 3.0 added greatly to the fuctionality of using a Linux machine as a domain controller. However like all things new it has yet to be seriously proven in the real world. The creaters of Samba, of course, went thru serious pains to make sure that 3.0 will function correctly and as documented. It has been a long time coming and seriously large amounts of testing and proving went into it before they released 3.0 as stable. Otherwise if your still not sure the Samba 2.x series has widespead adoption and testing and documentation. 3.0 should work, and if it does, it does (if you get my drift).

heres a fairly detailed document describing how windows domain function and how Samba fits into it and it's capabilities.

Irregardless I would recommend that you keep your w2k box for the time being and get a cheap computer (maybe a unused desktop) and test out using Redhat or some such OS on it for a while till you get comfortable and are able to get it to do everything that you need it to do, before retiring the old w2k installation.

If a actuall exchange replacement is what your looking into, you can check out opengroupware.org. Combining this with OpenOffice.org may provide a means to ween yourself off of windows products, or at least save yourself considurable amount of money.

But I think that Opengroupware is something that is still kinda new, and I have no experiance with it. Although it may be worth checking out. It's seems also that you would have to set up a email server in addition to it.

Another thing to look into is using Sendmail or Qmail to act as a email server. <a target=new class=ftalternatingbarlinklarge href="http://
http://www.tldp.org/HOWTO/Qmail-VMailMgr-Courier-imap-HOWTO/">something like this maybe?</a>

unfortunately my personal experiane is limited in situations like this.

If your worried about your non-guru-ness, you could always buy support from Redhat. That way you have their experiance at your disposal if you were to run into problems. For instance the standard edition of Redhat ES (their midrange server product) costs 799$ and for technical support you get:

Standard Edition provides a full year of Standard support (includes Monday-Friday 9 a.m.-9 p.m. phone support with four hour response (9 a.m.-5 p.m. outside North America) and a one-year subscription to Red Hat Network. Customers ordering Standard Edition will receive a full boxed product with CDs and printed documentation.

This is designed for servers up to 2 cpu's and up to 8 gigs of Ram operating on x86 style hardware.

:: Capabilities

* Mail
* File (SMB/NFS)
* Print
* Accelerated Web (tux)
* Advanced Firewall (arptables)
* Extended Remote Shell Access/Mgmt
* DHCP
* DNS Nameserver
* Network Authentication (Kerberos)
* News
* Backup
* Dump Server (Netdump)
* Directory Server (LDAP)
* SSL
* Remote Boot/Image Server

This would give you a good leg up on your Linux conversions and hopefully make it relatively trouble-free.

The basic edition is $399 and doesn't include the cds/documentation mailed to you, and loses the phone support. However you still have support via the subscription to "redhat network".

(just a idea)

 

[lowtech1]

I'm not too sure how well Samba 3.0 is performing, but it does support MS native AD, however early adopters are having trouble with Winbind that may have been fixed with 3.0.1pre1 release.

IMHO, wait 6 months to a year for the bugs to be iron out before jumping on the Samba DC bandwagon. I personally am very interest in the technology & will be testing it shortly.

[edit]Also try linux.samba newsgroup.

 

[Barnaby W. Füi]

Originally posted by: lowtech
I'm too sure as how well Samba 3.0 is performing, but does support MS native AD, however early adopters are having trouble with Winbind that may has been fixed with 3.0.1pre1 release.

IMHO, wait 6 months to a year for the bugs to be iron out before jumping on the Samba DC bandwagon. I personally am very interest in the technology & will be testing it shortly.

[edit]Also try linux.samba newsgroup.

I used samba 3 at work starting over 6 months ago (probably about 9) with winbind, and samba being the domain controller. Works ok.

 

[drag]

Originally posted by: BingBongWongFooey

Originally posted by: lowtech
I'm too sure as how well Samba 3.0 is performing, but does support MS native AD, however early adopters are having trouble with Winbind that may has been fixed with 3.0.1pre1 release.

IMHO, wait 6 months to a year for the bugs to be iron out before jumping on the Samba DC bandwagon. I personally am very interest in the technology & will be testing it shortly.

[edit]Also try linux.samba newsgroup.

I used samba 3 at work starting over 6 months ago (probably about 9) with winbind, and samba being the domain controller. Works ok.

What do you use for e-mail and stuff like that?

 

[stash]

I'm still not clear if Samba 3 will support being the PDC emulator in either a mixed mode or native mode active directory domain. The previous versions of samba definitely didnt, and many people ended up in a world of pain because of that.

Regardless, I would be very VERY hesitant to samba the DC that your Exchange will rely on...first of all it's untested, and second, it's unsupported by Microsoft. You have a problem with Exchange down the line, no matter what it is? Forget about talking to PSS.

Also, if the exchange box is also the DC, and its the only DC, you need to be worrying more about having another DC in the domain, and I do not mean a samba machine.

 

[drag]

Samba can work fine as a primary domain controller, but it's not going to give you all the functionality of w2k domain controller, especially if you considure exchange server.

You see all active directory is, is basicly a LDAP server with a database that runs on some propriatory database software in windows 2000. It authenticates users and uses a modified version of kerebos for encryption.

That's ALL it is.

In itself it is pretty easy to replicate using Openldap and some bits and peices of other software. If you stick to the scemas then the clients can't realy tell the difference.

Linux has had the capability to replicate a Windows Active directory server for a long time. But required special expertese and time. For most people it wouldn't of been worth the effort.

With Samba 3.0 they are attempting to create a solution under one entire project.

The point is that Active Directory, even though it seems some super-microsoft only doo-dad, is nothing new or unusual.

Take for example Novell's Netware stuff. They've been doing the exact same thing with their software. In all actuallity it is more secure, stable, and faster then any windows-only enviroment.

The total overall Network domain enviroment in windows is provided by a series of independant tools and programs. The Active directory server is just part of it.

Linux in this case is a 90% replacement.

It can do the functionality of 90% of what windows can do, just fine. This is a limitation put on by the fact that it actually isn't windows. If you want a windows server, a linux server is a pretty sh**y at it.

However on the flip side Linux can do a hell of a lot that windows can't do. Plus it's pretty much infinately scalable and usually a much cheaper alternative. Not to forget also in the hands of a professional it is naturally more secure and much easier to maintain.

So what this guy needs to do is determine what he wants from a server. What sort of things that would be required from it.

Then he should find the programs and services best suited to his goals and then apply them to the problem.

That's why I recommended him to have a simple Linux server on the side in a test enviroment to determine if can work out for him.

At most it would cost him a spare machine (temperarially) and the time and effort that goes into learning a new OS.

As long as you test, and don't remove the current server from the production enviroment then your safe from any reprocussions. Then when your ready to switch you know what to do and what to expect.

In light of the horrible situations caused by bad programming and design from Microsoft, I think it would be at least worth serious considuration.

If it doesn't work out, wait six months and come back when Samba is more established.

Of course if in his business (each situation is different) if the Linux desktop can fuffil the roles that windows currently plays, then he can dispense with the whole Half and Half active directory/linux stuff and go with a complete open source solution. Which would be ideal.

 

[Barnaby W. Füi]

Originally posted by: drag

Originally posted by: BingBongWongFooey

Originally posted by: lowtech
I'm too sure as how well Samba 3.0 is performing, but does support MS native AD, however early adopters are having trouble with Winbind that may has been fixed with 3.0.1pre1 release.

IMHO, wait 6 months to a year for the bugs to be iron out before jumping on the Samba DC bandwagon. I personally am very interest in the technology & will be testing it shortly.

[edit]Also try linux.samba newsgroup.

I used samba 3 at work starting over 6 months ago (probably about 9) with winbind, and samba being the domain controller. Works ok.

What do you use for e-mail and stuff like that?

We don't have a mail server there, just some windows machines that need to share files and logons (and the same logons work between windows and linux)