Which network operating system?

[spidey07]

OK, time to let the dogs loose and have a network operating system debate (war). I'm really interested in everybody's opinons for a large NOS rollout.

In this scenario there are hundreds of networked locations, so the ability to seamlessly integrate the whole system is a plus (read directory services). Anywhere access to information/applications (palm, pocketPC, VPNs). Cost matters but only from the perspective of total cost of ownership (what good is a free OS, if it costs 5 times as much to support?)

Secure
IP only
Remote management very important
Global support very important

I've been considering linux, netware, and windows2000/xp. Pros and cons to each.

 

[DnetMHZ]

wow this could get ugly..

Based on the need for a very large directory I'm going to have to lean towards Netware.
I have no real experience with NIS and I think AD is an abomination, so I'm saying Netware & NDS.

DnetMHZ

sorry for the lack of detail but it's time to go home.

 

[reicherb]

I'm far from an authority, but from my experience I'd say Netware and probably a third party or hardware VPN.

 

[bignick]

well let's see -

win2k/xp (actually called .net, who care anyways?)
pros
active directory - very cool directory service
group policy object - very detailed policies to be set on users, computers, etc. (very dependent on active directory)
lot's of hardware options
lot's of software options

cons
upfront costs in licensing
virus/trojan/worm prone
ease of administration
this is bad, because the easier something is, the more slack people become. look at codeRed and nimda. non, not a single
one of my NT or Win2k servers, or workstations were infected. I'm not lucky, I know my sh*t when it comes to locking
windows boxes, because it's my job and I take it seriously.

netware
pros
directory service
relatively large hardware options
been around the block long enough, that's pretty damn good.

cons
how much longer will novell be around?
software options

linux/unix
don't know enough to make a good comparison, but have a little to say. first, tried and true OS. whatever you through at it, it can handle. but just about any NOS can do that if managed well. lot's of hardware and software options. actually conforms to network protocol standards. M$ always has to change something, just a little, to make their NOS's network stack "special".



may the war begin...............................

 

[BigCheeze]

OOOO this is too easy....

Netware/NDS for File & Print servers and Network Authentication.
Win2000 Advance Server for Application server (Exchange, etc...)
Solaris for Web/Database server
Win2000 Pro for desktop.


HAHAHAHAHA!!! That's a perfect world right there!!

 

[ScottMac]

(What a coincidence, I'm even wearing my red shirt today)....

Novell would be the only choice, given your scenario. Because:

It has a well developed and mature (read mostly debugged) Directory Service that's LDAP compliant/compatible (I believe it's also X-Dot compatible/compliant as well).

It is still the fastest file & print service commonly available on the planet.

It widely suported by a global organization and associates.

It also offers extremely fast cached proxy/border/barrier functionality.

It's very secure.

It offers a native client interface for 99.99% of the possible client OS available.

In addition to the full clustering capability, you can designate one (or more if you like) server to backup the services or applications for a group of servers on a per-service/per-application basis (as a hot/online standby).

Full support for hot-swap hardware on the servers.

The servers (almost) never requires a re-boot after a patch or feature is added.

Cisco supports NDS (or at least used to), I think Nortel does too.

RAS NDS integration.

Many/most VPN boxes can authenticate against NDS.

Netware has a very fast DNS service (with every server)

Netware has DHCP

Netware is still one of the fastest Web servers available (I believe it's also included with the server software)


Have you seen the write ups on Netware 6? It's extremely well done.

It's a real client-server architecture (built that way from day one), not a strap-on network to an ancient, inefficient client operating system. Look back in ancient history regarding the old 'Ring Zero' arguments that MS used to throw out against Novell.....until they figured out it was the only way the MS operating systems would be able to handle real-time and adopted it as their own.....

For a hard-core database server, it's still hard to beat a *nix box. They were built for it and (IMHO) still the best choice for a DB server.

*nix and/or the SMB server from Sun might be reasonable alternatives (can't imagine why), but Microsoft wouldn't even be in the picture (unless you HAVE to hire a bunch of GUI-head weenies to manage the net ;-} ) ...maybe if it was running on the Tandem boxes...naaaa...why bother?

That's my two cents.

Happy Holidays

Scott

 

[spidey07]

i was hoping it wouldn't get ugly (so far so good)

NW6 is looking pretty sweet for all the reason ScottMac and others have suggested. My only beef with it is finding good worldwide partner support. MS has just beaten NW into the ground on support and third-party development.

I've always loved *nix for DB servers but recent benchmarks prove intel boxes can outshine. Still can't figure that one out.

Windows - getting better, but AD has a long way to go. And darnit they just crash too much. Well maybe crash is a harsh word - servers just up and do what they want without any logs or any indication "just reboot" is not an answer.

 

[ScottMac]

I believe IBM has global support (for Netware), at least one of the "Big Eight" has got to have some sort of "Novell Department".
Give Siemens consulting a call. If they don't have a big Novell support team, they'll hire one...they're pretty flexable folks that way....

Nuts, Novell oughta to either be able to support it directly, or give you the name of someone who can.

If you can't find someone in the USA, check with some of the Europeans, there's a group out of South Africa Persatel/Pursetel....can't remember the spelling...phonetically it comes out "Purse-A-Tel, Q" ..they're s'posed to be big pretty much everywhere, and expanding into the USA pretty rapidly.

If there's enough money involved, I know a few guys that'll volunteer for global pager duty.....

FWIW

Scott

 

[SaigonK]

Netware...netware....Netware....
NW6 is great, the whole clientless clinet is a big step in the right direction for Novell, the netware clients in themselves suck.
Putting Novell on a 2k box normally results in a box going to crap sooner or later, not that Windows netowrking is any better.

The whole .net is useless until .Net server comes out, at which time it will "supposedly" do NDS style syncs etc etc.
NDS is great, but be wary as well....if it isnt configured right - get ready for a headache of major proportions.
Zen for desktops makes for remote management and for pushing apps and updates, the NAL isnt my favorite way of delivering apps (mostly due to working with ZEN2), but Zen 3 is alot better....

 

[n0cmonkey]

RedHat, IBM, and SuSE would all be happy to help out with linux, but it actually sounds like a lot of work. Not that work is bad mind you

So far Netware seems to have gotten the most votes. Hopefully they can keep the company running for a little longer...

 

[Garion]

I hate to be the dissident here, but I'd vote Win2K. I agree that NDS is a superior directory service and that Windows can't hold a candle to Netware for file services.

I say this for several reasons:

1: I believe the financial viability of Novell is seriously in doubt - When they merged with CTP, only 1 of the old Novell board stayed in place, all others were from CTP - What does that tell you about the future direction of the company and the resources they are putting towards Netware?

2: Unfortunately, the world of applications are moving to Windows - I don't know of any major (Save Websphere) non-Novell apps that run as an NLM which are available today. Tight integration between your app servers and the rest of your network is key. Yes, there's a great NDS client for NT, but does everything fully support it?

3: The resources that MS puts towards NT is far greater than Novell can afford to. Their product is advancing far faster than Novell.

4: The bulk of the 3rd party tools (ie, appliance servers, etc.) are building tie-ins to AD and fewer are focusing on NDS. Sure, you can use LDAP, but you loose a lot of functionality that way.

5: It's difficult, time-consuming, and could be technically problematic to separate your messaging system from your NOS. Groupwise is OK, but it can't hold a candle to Exchange (IMHO). Plus, almost everything that is messaging-enabled has Exchange hooks, few have full links into Groupwise. (That NLM thing again)

6: Staff to support a Microsoft environment is readily available and will be so for the future. With Novell's decline, you're going to find fewer and fewer people to support it. Look at the ration to CNE's vs MCSE's nowadays.

Granted, NT servers do require a bit more TLC than Netware, but that's getting better with each release - We're in the JDP for .NET and so far it's looking pretty good. Great features, AD is more extensible and there's a lot of great new features.

Best of luck in your research and decision!

- G

 

[MikeMAN]

i don't know a whole lot about NOS's, but i am gunna have to put in my vote for Novell Netware on this one....

it is very stable, and reliable............my uncle has it installed at his workplace and so far he has nothing but good things to say about it!

mike

 

[spidey07]

Nice point Garion. I share your concerns with Novells viability/third-party support/development. Now you can see my dilema. I truly believe NW is a BETTER NOS. Does that mean I should deploy netware? NO.

There are so many other business factors involved that the "best" NOS isn't necessarily the right pick. It is a very tough call to make.

 

[Garion]

IMHO, the idea of calling something a "NOS" is really not accurate nowadays. You need to evaluate your file/print, your application services, your messaging, etc. It is possible that the OS for one isn't right for the other - I'd never use Solaris as a messaging server, for example - Just not enough features in the packages available (Unless you ask Oracle, of course).

My argument for NT is fairly simple - If you have to pick one to do everything, it's really the only choice. Nothing else has the breadth of scope to handle it. Sad but true. Unless you want to get into a situation where you support Novell for file/print and directory, NT/2K/.NET for apps and messaging, Windows for the desktop, Unix for some big iron, etc. you are just adding an additional layer of complexity and support requirements. There are benefits, but not enough to justify the huge additional complexity trying to tie them all in together.

Novell zealots will argue that it integrates very well with NT/Windows, but no matter how tightly it hooks in, you're still adding an additional layer of management and software. The old rule of computing kicks in here- Keep it simple and it will work. Less is more, as long as it meets your needs.

- G

 

[ScottMac]

Well, the impression I'm getting from Spidey, is that it's allowed to choose "best of breed" for any given component of the network.

Buying Novel for Directory, file, print, DNS, DHCP...whatever/any/all is still a good choice. If you buy Novell today, and the company goes in the trash tomorrow, youstill have a good NOS for the next (potentially) couple years. I know some (as in a couple) small businesses that are still running 215c (!)- Y2K be damned...Novell has an exccellent reputation for having "legs." That's one of it's big selling points, you don't have to change it every year or two because of some new neat "feature" that Microsoft decides you GOTTA have. As long as the hardware holds up, you have a mighty fine NOS cooking in the glass palace.

If personnel and support are an issue, TRAIN 'em (but handcuff'em), Novell is NOT that hard to learn. Again, even if it went belly up (personally, I think they'll be around for a while), the ugliest part of the setup is the DIrectory design, and the concepts are portable. If you were later "forced" to go to Microsoft, the concepts applicable to Novell are applicable to MAD..some syntax/procedural differences....not a big deal. There are slo some translators availble to *cough* upgrade *cough* to MAD. SO the previous setup work will not be loast (except it'll be sux delux under Microsoft).

Novell is still the best choice. MIcrosoft networking still sucks (as it has since the mid-eighties) in compariosn. Peer-to-Peer in a corporate environment is still the worst of all possible worlds. Even if the MS server is "dedicated," it's still wasting time & resources maintaining a desktop environment. It's still a desktop environment with network services glued on.

You're safe enough with Novell to at least cover you for a couple years untill MS get it's sh*t in one sock regaring Directory Services.

If not Novell, then the Sun Solaris/SMB server (I forgot the clever marketing name). Maybe even the Apple networking stuff...at least their honest in making it for the brain dead.....truth in advertising has to account for something.

Microsoft, in the large corporate networking environment, should always be the last choice.... some day if you get me drunk enough, I'll tell you how I really feel...

FWIW

Scott

 

[spidey07]

well Scott. We're a all novell 4.11 shop now. Our Trees work great. Sun for all large applications and a few NT/2000 servers keep popping up (they're like rabbits you know). Funny how our entire campus is run with two novell servers but yet it takes 20 NT servers to do the same.

It is the darned third-party support that is killing us. I'm so tired of hearing from vendors (like recent enterprise backup solution, reminds me that was a cool project...have to start another thread), we don't support Novell and never will. I almost feel "forced" into a microsoft solution, and don't get me started on MS reps and the licensing fiasco.

 

[ScottMac]

Well, there ya go, I knew you'd run a reasonable shop.

Have you tried talking to the local/regional Novell office? The folks I used to deal with here in Chicago (well, the 'burbs) always had directories of local, regional and national resources (Platinum & gold VARS), consultants, etc.

Whatever, it's a shame...VHS won over Beta too...what can ya do?

FWIW

Scott

 

[spidey07]

<< Whatever, it's a shame...VHS won over Beta too...what can ya do? >>


true...true.

Novel rep is a little hottie I play golf with sometimes.

Read through my posts and you'll see I love novell. but at the same time have to examine other factors beyond my on biases and choose wisely.

 

[ScottMac]

I s'pose you could leverage this right and get a comparable,highly professional sales rep (from MS or Red Hat) to get you a round or two at pebble beach......

We had a female sales rep where I used to work, and on "closing days" would wear a "variable sleeze" skirt with the full range of "choose your flooze" buttons up the side. Aside from that, she was one of the best salespeople I've ever worked with, but hey...it'd be negligent to go to "war" without the complete arsenal at your disposal.

Life in these here U-nited States....


FWIW

Scott

 

[Tallgeese]

making quota, heh. gotta love it...

don't care what anybody says...
CAPITALISM RULEZ!

 

[reicherb]

good discussion bump.

 

[Tallgeese]

Honestly, I think it's remiss to not take into account the financial stability of a company when designing/deciding, doubly so for a LARGE project (like the one spidey is using as a scenario here).

When I started doin the tech mambo (10 years ago, so I'm still a baby compared to some of you), I very rarely had to worry about a vendor's financial position before making a decision. Now...that's nearly 50% of what I do when making a big platform/application/licensing/whatever spec or decision.

Do I blindly love M$? Hell no. Do I champion Novell whenever and wherever I can? That's a big negative negative as well.

What I see as the strengths of each:

M$:
* Terminal Services kicks MAJOR bootay (especially if you're not a multi-platform shop and don't need to pay for the Citrix overlay)
* For application serving below a certain price point, tough to beat
* Vendor and development support out the wazoo

Novell:
* Hardest working, most dependable NOS in the industry for cornerstone services (user auth, file, print, and infra IP services like DHCP, DNS, etc.)
* NDS = Hands-down best directory service
* Stable, well-debugged NOS


Cons:

M$:
* Better get ready to buy and support MUCHO hardware
* Can't/won't give up the idea of full desktop functionality (which its additional instability) on a server console
* Their grand scheme for usage-based software rental is at odds with the idea of a locally based server

Novell:
* Their client software sucks so bad right now, its problems alone could sink the company
* NDS is not leveraged much (if at all) by Novell's app offerings, so no external developers will even try.
* Crippling brain drain, developer support/interest drying up, and their licensing schemes are UNGODLY expensive compared to M$

 

[spidey07]

Glad you're in my corner TallGeese.

Financial stabilty does come into play. Do I think nortel/extereme has better PERFORMING products. Hell yes. But performance is a small factor considering when you play into this league performance can be bought. (doesn't really matter what you choose...I can throw hardware at an app all day long)

What does matter:
Integration - man everybody wants to key off active directory. good or bad, that's the way I see it.

ScottMAC - Yes, I absolutely can choose best of breed products for certain initiatives. But I'm getting sick and tired of not having a true "cohesive" network like I "used" to have with novell 3.12. We have 50 big suns for enterprise apps, each having its own set of userIDs and rights for each particular application. We have dial-in. We have SecureID soft tokens. We have SecureID hard tokens. We have PKI/certificats. We have VPN (name your flavor). We have firewall based authentication. We have NT servers. We have 2000 servers. We have application rights on those NT/2000 app servers. There is no resemblence of anyting remotely cohesive.

I think I'm in the situation a lot of enterprises are in. And this is why NOS choice is so important. NDS and AD both bring some of that cohesion to the table....but which one. Unfortunately my business hat say 2000. My tech hat says netware. My stock is based on the business. I must grudingly choose 2000.

Little ol' me just wants some good directory services that can mesh with the Internet and add anybody/anywhere authentication/authorization to the fabulous bundle of apps I have hidden behind many firewalls.

<edit> don't make me put on my security hat, then we open up a whole new can of worms.