The Most Convoluted Network EVER!
-
@thanksajdotcom said:
So you'd think they have a pretty good AD setup, right? Well, they've got Server 2008, 2008 R2, and 2012 for their AD, which means it's at a 2008 level. However, LDAP is handled by a SOLARIS server! HOLY CRAP! Their Windows AD ties into the Solaris server for user accounts, etc. Oh wait, it gets better. DNS isn't handled by Windows either. They've got BIND setup on a Linux server, which also ties into Windows AD.
That's because OpenLDAP and BIND are 10000x faster than Windows in a wide disparate network.
Remember, AD follows standards of LDAP and BIND, it's pretty good about it too. There isn't any reason why you can't use it, other than having lazy Windows admins who don't know how to integrate it. When you have potentially thousands of devices requesting access, there is no reason why they should be tied down to one technology when things like BIND run so much faster than Windows DNS.
-
You all forget that it is AJ, the thief, that stated in the other thread to just use the DNS and DHCP because it did not matter if you had CALs or not.
-
@JaredBusch said:
You all forget that it is AJ, the thief, that stated in the other thread to just use the DNS and DHCP because it did not matter if you had CALs or not.
A thread about licensing? Please link
-
What's wrong? Mixing Linux and Windows is normal. Bind is great, heck you can use Zone Trasnfers and get the Windows DNS much faster and without the need for CALs for all the clients.
What's Wrong with who handles LDAP. Windows AD is just another form of it, This isn't unusual to share them between systems.
Also what they are doing with IPv4 address is exactly what IPV6 is meant to accomplish.
-
Also posting that we works at [very specific school] and [very specific retailer] is too much info online. You could be getting him in trouble for this post.
-
@thecreativeone91 said:
Also posting that we works at [redacted personal info] is too much info online. You could be getting him in trouble for this post.
Seriously, you've completely identified an innocent coworker. Anyone working at the only [that school] in the area would know pretty much instantly who it is. And the retailer would have little issue identifying him too.
-
@tonyshowoff said:
A thread about licensing? Please link
The thread was not about licensing. It evolved to that form a pertino discussion I think.
-
@tonyshowoff said:
@JaredBusch said:
You all forget that it is AJ, the thief, that stated in the other thread to just use the DNS and DHCP because it did not matter if you had CALs or not.
A thread about licensing? Please link
-
Thread has been modded to protect AJ's buddy's personal identify. Please no one copy any of the previously mentioned very private information. Identifying your own employer or yourself you are allowed to do. Please no one identify innocent third parties who aren't here to request redaction.
-
@JaredBusch said:
You all forget that it is AJ, the thief, that stated in the other thread to just use the DNS and DHCP because it did not matter if you had CALs or not.
STFU @JaredBusch.
-
Our business has two separate divisions, one is adult entertainment and the other is MSP, additionally we partly own some actual stores. I never even talk about where any of these things are located (except I've mentioned we run our adult entertainment stuff out of the Netherlands, nothing more), and I never mention names of anything, for a good reason. Primarily because I don't want any other business I'm involved with to be connected with adult entertainment, since that's off putting to people, but also just in case, because I may piss off someone online and if they know what these sites or businesses are, it could become a bad situation. If I were you AJ I'd never mention working at where you do, instead I'd say "office retailer" or something. I'll talk all day long about the technology we use, but you'll never find a post of me saying where it's used at, I'm even hesitant talking about it in PM with people, lest they bring it up, even by accident in public, though AFK/IRL in person I do mention names sometimes.
PS I'm not the one who down voted you, in fact the STFU made me laugh out loud, but full disclosure, him calling you a thief also made me lol.
-
Mixing networks is completely normal. While this IS a complex network, it does not appear to be ridiculously complex. If the primary concern is around having both Windows and UNIX in the same network, I don't see anything wrong there, at least not at this level.
Sure, with lots of analysis, we might determine cost savings or feature advantages by going down to just Windows or UNIX, but we'd need a lot more information to make that determination. Tons of companies have both. Large networks are complex things. The way an SMB works is little related to how an enterprise works.
-
@tonyshowoff said:
Our business has two separate divisions, one is adult entertainment and the other is MSP, additionally we partly own some actual stores. I never even talk about where any of these things are located (except I've mentioned we run our adult entertainment stuff out of the Netherlands, nothing more), and I never mention names of anything, for a good reason.
Heck, I don't even put my current employer on Linkedin or Facebook for good reason. Don't just my real name much of anywhere either.
-
@thecreativeone91 said:
@tonyshowoff said:
Our business has two separate divisions, one is adult entertainment and the other is MSP, additionally we partly own some actual stores. I never even talk about where any of these things are located (except I've mentioned we run our adult entertainment stuff out of the Netherlands, nothing more), and I never mention names of anything, for a good reason.
Heck, I don't even put my current employer on Linkedin or Facebook for good reason. Don't just my real name much of anywhere either.
Made the mistake of using my real name on SW, but I've been switching over to this handle everywhere else, too late to switch on SW I think.
-
@thanksajdotcom said:
@JaredBusch said:
You all forget that it is AJ, the thief, that stated in the other thread to just use the DNS and DHCP because it did not matter if you had CALs or not.
STFU @JaredBusch.
Sure thing.
-
@scottalanmiller said:
Mixing networks is completely normal. While this IS a complex network, it does not appear to be ridiculously complex. If the primary concern is around having both Windows and UNIX in the same network, I don't see anything wrong there, at least not at this level.
Sure, with lots of analysis, we might determine cost savings or feature advantages by going down to just Windows or UNIX, but we'd need a lot more information to make that determination. Tons of companies have both. Large networks are complex things. The way an SMB works is little related to how an enterprise works.
I've never worked anywhere that was solely windows. we've always have some Linux or Unix, or FreeBSD. my current temp contract is a full Linux based environment, though we are probably pretty rare.
-
It's not the fact that they mixed *nix and Windows together that concerns me. I've seen plenty of places do that. I guess I can't really explain it. Not usually at a loss for words but I am now.
-
@thanksajdotcom said:
It's not the fact that they mixed *nix and Windows together that concerns me. I've seen plenty of places do that. I guess I can't really explain it. Not usually at a loss for words but I am now.
The only difference would be they are well integrated which isn't a bad thing. Many SMBs will use windows as the primary and *Nix just kinda poorly thrown on top of it.
-
@thecreativeone91 said:
@thanksajdotcom said:
It's not the fact that they mixed *nix and Windows together that concerns me. I've seen plenty of places do that. I guess I can't really explain it. Not usually at a loss for words but I am now.
The only difference would be they are well integrated which isn't a bad thing. Many SMBs will use windows as the primary and *Nix just kinda poorly thrown on top of it.
The place this is implemented has had many issues though. I haven't personally seen the network so everything I know is second-hand, but I've been told they've had all kinds of issues with their setup.
-
@thecreativeone91 said:
@scottalanmiller said:
Mixing networks is completely normal. While this IS a complex network, it does not appear to be ridiculously complex. If the primary concern is around having both Windows and UNIX in the same network, I don't see anything wrong there, at least not at this level.
Sure, with lots of analysis, we might determine cost savings or feature advantages by going down to just Windows or UNIX, but we'd need a lot more information to make that determination. Tons of companies have both. Large networks are complex things. The way an SMB works is little related to how an enterprise works.
I've never worked anywhere that was solely windows. we've always have some Linux or Unix, or FreeBSD. my current temp contract is a full Linux based environment, though we are probably pretty rare.
I can't say that I have either. I've been in pure UNIX, but never pure Windows. Even the SMB Startup that I was at in 2000, with only twelve users, was mixed 50/50.
