<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Linux and Active Directory</title>
	<atom:link href="http://blog.snurkle.net/2008/10/linux-and-active-directory/feed" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://blog.snurkle.net/2008/10/linux-and-active-directory</link>
	<description>random musings from the hamster</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Thu, 02 Dec 2010 22:34:52 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.0</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: hamster</title>
		<link>http://blog.snurkle.net/2008/10/linux-and-active-directory/comment-page-1#comment-1703</link>
		<dc:creator>hamster</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 01 Nov 2008 06:45:16 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.snurkle.net/?p=143#comment-1703</guid>
		<description>I&#039;d almost prefer to go this way as well.  I once had a great setup with redundant Kerberos servers (and only Kerberos on those boxen, they were really locked down), redundant LDAP servers, and I had 3 linux clusters, a handful of IRIX boxen, and a bunch of Linux boxen all authenticating against it all.  Very slick.

However, in this case, it just somehow seemed simpler to go with the Windows AD, but I gotta admit, I just can&#039;t seem to get the same kind of simple insight into what the hell is going on on the AD box as I am used to with Linux.  Very annoying.  I may yet switch over.

I just got roaming profiles working, with the profiles residing on the Linux box and auth coming from the AD.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I&#8217;d almost prefer to go this way as well.  I once had a great setup with redundant Kerberos servers (and only Kerberos on those boxen, they were really locked down), redundant LDAP servers, and I had 3 linux clusters, a handful of IRIX boxen, and a bunch of Linux boxen all authenticating against it all.  Very slick.</p>
<p>However, in this case, it just somehow seemed simpler to go with the Windows AD, but I gotta admit, I just can&#8217;t seem to get the same kind of simple insight into what the hell is going on on the AD box as I am used to with Linux.  Very annoying.  I may yet switch over.</p>
<p>I just got roaming profiles working, with the profiles residing on the Linux box and auth coming from the AD.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Bill Weiss</title>
		<link>http://blog.snurkle.net/2008/10/linux-and-active-directory/comment-page-1#comment-1702</link>
		<dc:creator>Bill Weiss</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 01 Nov 2008 05:49:08 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.snurkle.net/?p=143#comment-1702</guid>
		<description>I once set up the opposite (Windows clients authenticating to a Linux box running kerberos and stuff), and it wasn&#039;t bad at all.  Samba integration was trivial.

This was in an environment without an existing Windows server, of course :)</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I once set up the opposite (Windows clients authenticating to a Linux box running kerberos and stuff), and it wasn&#8217;t bad at all.  Samba integration was trivial.</p>
<p>This was in an environment without an existing Windows server, of course <img src='http://blog.snurkle.net/wp-includes/images/smilies/icon_smile.gif' alt=':)' class='wp-smiley' /> </p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

