Windows Server Trusts Samba4 Active Directory

Darren Ginter writes "A group of Samba v4 developers recently spent a week in Redmond to work with Microsoft on Active Directory interoperability(?!). The result? Windows Server will now join, trust and replicate a Samba-based Active Directory using Microsoft-native protocols. Although Samba v4 is still in the alpha stages, this is a huge step for open source. Or it could be a trap."

Comments

It's a nice story...

[rcolbert]

...and good to know the hard working Samba team came away from Redmond feeling positive about the progress that was made. I don't think it's an earth moving change in the relationship between MS and the free world, but it's better than a sharp stick in the eye.

Re:It's a nice story...

[Platinum Dragon]

I don't think it's an earth moving change in the relationship between MS and the free world, but it's better than a sharp stick in the eye.

I'll breathe easier if this doesn't result in legal trouble for Linux distributions and the *BSDs down the road. MS has a long, long way to go before I could ever trust them to do something with the open source community for any purpose other than to, eventually, obliterate it as a threat.

Publicly recanting the Halloween Documents, and particularly "embrace, extend, and extinguish" would be a start, if only a start.

OK, it's an MS-created protocol anyway, but I'm still very suspicious about MS management's ultimate motives in allowing this collaboration to take place.

Re:Of course it's a trap

[Z00L00K]

And then - "Who do you trust and who do you serve?".

Anyway - you can't be too sure about anything these days, but if Microsoft doesn't cooperate they will have an even lower respect from the open source community than they have today.

In the end Microsoft are probably needing this cooperation.

Re:Just Don't See How This Could Be A 'Trap'

[fluffy99]

Folks interested in saving a buck will start using Samba servers to either completely host or participate in Active Directory domains. The trap or catch will come further down the road when Microsoft patches something that breaks the functionality, at which point Microsoft will simply state that if you wanted something reliable you should have used genuine Windows servers. Don't believe me? The samba project is already rife with examples of this. Didn't we see Samba choke when enterprises tightening up security disabled ntlmv1?

I seriously doubt Samba-based AD servers will be fully functional anyway, just like Samba emulating an NT4 domain was just barely functional. Microsoft helped them figure out how to use the native Microsoft protocols to replicate the AD database instead of having to rely on the semi-functional openldap hack they had been using (actually be be more accurate, MS confirmed and correct their reverse engineering of the protocols).

Being able to replicating the AD database/ldap and form working trusts does not make Samba a good substitute for AD. It simply gives it an ability to co-exist with a real AD infrastructure. GPOs and most of the other desirable features of Active Directory are not implemented in Samba. Big businesses will still use MS boxes to ensure all the features work and its stable, since the cost of the software is not the driving factor.

Re:How many years has Samba4 been in development n

[argent]

I think you mean "this is a sterling example of how poorly documented and understood, even within Microsoft, Windows behavior is".

Microsoft had to dig into Windows kernel source to figure out why Windows didn't like what Samba was doing. How the hell was the Samba team supposed to figure it out from specs?

This is why the OOXML spec is six and a half thousand pages long and even then parts of it still read, simply, "do what Excel does here".

This is good news

[Orion Blastar]

back in 1995 I ran a small business that did Linux installs for companies to replace Windows NT Server systems with Linux plus Samba. We used Slackware Linux and then later Red Hat, but it did Windows file and printer sharing for Windows clients and saved those businesses thousands in Windows Server licenses.

But when Active Directory came out, companies switched back to Windows Server, because Linux and Samba lacked that. Exchange can be done via OpenExchange and use MySQL or PostgreSQL instead of SQL Server.

Linux has to match Windows Server feature by feature in order to compete with it, and be used. Linux might never replace Windows on the desktop, but it can replace Windows on the server as Unix and Linux are designed as server operating systems.