From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Mon, 10 Sep 2001 21:21:26 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Mon, 10 Sep 2001 21:21:17 -0400 Received: from static004-9-151-24.nt02-c4.cpe.charter-ne.com ([24.151.9.4]:31824 "EHLO Jupiter.LIWAVE.COM") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Mon, 10 Sep 2001 21:20:58 -0400 Reply-To: From: "Ron Van Dam" To: "'Chris Siebenmann'" , Subject: RE: FW: OT: Integrating Directory Services for Linux Date: Mon, 10 Sep 2001 21:20:56 -0400 Message-ID: <002201c13a60$022e1350$1f0201c0@w2k001> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook 8.5, Build 4.71.2173.0 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4133.2400 In-Reply-To: <01Sep10.181449edt.63201@gpu.utcc.utoronto.ca> Importance: Normal Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Chris Siebenmann wrote: >> What if some less then enthusiastic has semi-mangled a /etc file. > Then the registry breaks in the same way. There is always something >that someone can do to screw the machine up; moving where most of the >data is stored doesn't change that. At most it reduces the number of >knobs someone can break off. Not true. First I would like to say the a directory service isn't a registry. It's a database to store information in a organized system. There is nothing organized about the windows registry! The window registry is nothing more than a huge INI file with bits and pieces of information everywhere. It has no schema to pervent anyone from adding an bits of information anywhere they want. With a text file I can put anything in it. I can make a 100 MB resolv.conf file if I wanted too. With a structured schema, the configuration can pretty much be locked down what information is summitted or changed. > No one dealing with a large collective of Unix machines is managing >them on a one-by-one basis. They are driving configurations out of a >central system for managing them, in some form or way, and if they have >any sense individualization is strongly discouraged if not exterminated. >(There are some quite elaborate systems for doing this, going so far as >to store everything in SQL databases. See various LISA proceedings.) Do you see DS as a bad thing for Linux? Tell why you think having a DS system for Linux would be a terrible waste? Thanks, Ron