From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: tuhs-bounces@minnie.tuhs.org X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.2 (2018-09-13) on inbox.vuxu.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.9 required=5.0 tests=HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS, MAILING_LIST_MULTI,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE,SUBJ_ALL_CAPS autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.2 Received: from minnie.tuhs.org (minnie.tuhs.org [45.79.103.53]) by inbox.vuxu.org (OpenSMTPD) with ESMTP id 531e7eb1 for ; Sun, 4 Nov 2018 23:43:11 +0000 (UTC) Received: by minnie.tuhs.org (Postfix, from userid 112) id 34E62A23EE; Mon, 5 Nov 2018 09:43:10 +1000 (AEST) Received: from minnie.tuhs.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by minnie.tuhs.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B31AFA21D9; Mon, 5 Nov 2018 09:42:51 +1000 (AEST) Received: by minnie.tuhs.org (Postfix, from userid 112) id 8D351A21D9; Mon, 5 Nov 2018 08:53:00 +1000 (AEST) X-Greylist: delayed 438 seconds by postgrey-1.35 at minnie.tuhs.org; Mon, 05 Nov 2018 08:52:59 AEST Received: from p3plsmtpa08-10.prod.phx3.secureserver.net (p3plsmtpa08-10.prod.phx3.secureserver.net [173.201.193.111]) by minnie.tuhs.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 9F91CA1FBC for ; Mon, 5 Nov 2018 08:52:59 +1000 (AEST) Received: from medusa.kilonet.net ([72.69.11.12]) by :SMTPAUTH: with ESMTPA id JR9IgJnW1zS5oJR9IgyM2j; Sun, 04 Nov 2018 15:45:40 -0700 Received: from [199.89.231.101] (ender.kilonet.net [199.89.231.101]) by medusa.kilonet.net (8.14.8/8.15.1) with ESMTP id wA4MjeHn022918 for ; Sun, 4 Nov 2018 17:45:40 -0500 (EST) To: tuhs@minnie.tuhs.org References: From: Arthur Krewat Message-ID: <0342052a-e3a0-2881-2710-a4d1cb18d5e1@kilonet.net> Date: Sun, 4 Nov 2018 17:45:38 -0500 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/52.9.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Language: en-US X-CMAE-Envelope: MS4wfKbDQ/8I07UdCqL5U3Keu5tgayzWIS4Jmf6Q/RGSENlEO9+r4k5jmYPuE6fV1qdg+Yjme+WcVyCqgqa7tgnuxOKsBFU8wRSx3nDw7EigCAeyyyxVomMZ lj0Hmejg+mxL+BSpVDoyKRRs/69tVlswLYeyhxzhBCqXM06OeT9p39iP Subject: Re: [TUHS] YP / NIS / NIS+ / LDAP X-BeenThere: tuhs@minnie.tuhs.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.20 Precedence: list List-Id: The Unix Heritage Society mailing list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: tuhs-bounces@minnie.tuhs.org Sender: "TUHS" On 11/4/2018 3:51 PM, Grant Taylor via TUHS wrote: > Does anyone have any experience with YP / NIS / NIS+ / LDAP as a > central directory on Unix? > I've used all three (NIS and YP are the same thing). I think it all depends on what you're centered on. If your user credentials are all in Active Directory, you use LDAP. If you already have LDAP, you use LDAP. If you've been using NIS for the past 20 years (like I have in my office), you stick with NIS+. NIS+? Same thing. NIS+ is a little limited, as I'm not sure what supports that anymore. I don't think even Solaris 11.x does. As to which is better, I really can't say. LDAP/AD has it's points. When NIS+ first came out, I gladly moved to it, as it has a compatibility mode that allows it to answer NIS queries. So the transition from NIS to NIS+ went smoothly. But that was an almost 100% Sun shop where I did that. if I were to start up a new environment today, and it was PURELY Unix, I'd probably use NIS. But then, I have a slew of scripts that I use to administer NIS (and NIS+) that use SCCS for change tracking, and also can populate DNS zones for the hosts map. To administer LDAP, you either use a GUI, or script things with ldapmodify, etc. Which is ghastly, IMO. art k.