Fedora directory users - May 2007 - FDS and RHDS : Are there any differences between them ?

Hi,

    Currently, I''m doing all my lab testing using Fedora Directory
Server 1.0.4 under RHES4 Advanced Server, but once all the lab tests are
done we are going to purchase RHDS (it''s too expensive to buy a RHDS
copy only to do lab testing right now).

    Does someone knows if there are any technnical differences between
FDS and RHDS ? Are there know technnical limitations in RHDS that FDS
doesn''t have or vice-versa ?

Regards,

-- 
André Luís Lopes
andrelop@aw2net.com.br

Andre,
I was told by an rhce from RedHat (we were in the same boat that your in almost
1 year ago) that there is not any difference between fds and rds, other than the
redhat logos have been removed from the fds version.

Aaron

-----Original Message-----
From: fedora-directory-users-bounces@redhat.com
[mailto:fedora-directory-users-bounces@redhat.com] On Behalf Of André Luís Lopes
Sent: Tuesday, May 22, 2007 2:00 PM
To: fedora-directory-users@redhat.com
Subject: [Fedora-directory-users] FDS and RHDS : Are there any differences
between them ?

Hi,

    Currently, I''m doing all my lab testing using Fedora Directory
Server 1.0.4 under RHES4 Advanced Server, but once all the lab tests are
done we are going to purchase RHDS (it''s too expensive to buy a RHDS
copy only to do lab testing right now).

    Does someone knows if there are any technnical differences between
FDS and RHDS ? Are there know technnical limitations in RHDS that FDS
doesn''t have or vice-versa ?

Regards,

-- 
André Luís Lopes
andrelop@aw2net.com.br

--
Fedora-directory-users mailing list
Fedora-directory-users@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-directory-users

Confidentiality Notice:
The information contained in this electronic message is intended for the
exclusive use of the individual or entity named above and may contain privileged
or confidential information.  If the reader of this message is not the intended
recipient or the employee or agent responsible to deliver it to the intended
recipient, you are hereby notified that dissemination, distribution or copying
of this information is prohibited.  If you have received this communication in
error, please notify the sender immediately by telephone and destroy the copies
you received.

Hello Aaron,

Bliss, Aaron escreveu:
> Andre,
> I was told by an rhce from RedHat (we were in the same boat that your in
almost 1 year ago) that there is not any difference between fds and rds, other
than the redhat logos have been removed from the fds version.
    First of all, sorry for replying so late, I was really very busy 
these days. Nice to know that someone from Red Hat confirmed that bot 
FDS and RHDS are technnically identical.

    I would like to ask you something : You wrote that you was in the 
same boat I''m now almost one year ago. Since then, have you deployed 
RHDS already ? Does it worked exactly as you tought it would work based 
on your tests using FDS ?

    What I''m most concerned with is some potential feature lacking  in 
RHDS (as FDS seems to be updated more frequently than RHDS and I''m 
testing using the latest FDS version, 1.0.4) compared to FDS, as I''m 
testing with FDS and would like to deploy RHDS later.

    Also, if someone from Red Hat is reading this message and would like 
to comment on this, please, be welcome to give your comments.

Regards,

-- 
André Luís Lopes
andrelop@aw2net.com.br

>    I would like to ask you something : You wrote that you was in the 
> same boat I''m now almost one year ago. Since then, have you
deployed
> RHDS already ? Does it worked exactly as you tought it would work 
> based on your tests using FDS ?
No, fds turned out to be very solid, and the community support is great, as
such, we couldn''t justify the cost of rds, especially since to date we
still would not have taken advantage of the paid for support...

Aaron

-----Original Message-----
From: Richard Megginson [mailto:rmeggins@redhat.com] 
Sent: Thursday, May 24, 2007 10:19 AM
To: General discussion list for the Fedora Directory server project.
Cc: Bliss, Aaron
Subject: Re: [Fedora-directory-users] FDS and RHDS : Are there any differences
between them ?

André Luís Lopes wrote:
> Hello Aaron,
>
> Bliss, Aaron escreveu:
>> Andre,
>> I was told by an rhce from RedHat (we were in the same boat that your 
>> in almost 1 year ago) that there is not any difference between fds 
>> and rds, other than the redhat logos have been removed from the fds 
>> version.
>
>    First of all, sorry for replying so late, I was really very busy 
> these days. Nice to know that someone from Red Hat confirmed that bot 
> FDS and RHDS are technnically identical.
>
>    I would like to ask you something : You wrote that you was in the 
> same boat I''m now almost one year ago. Since then, have you
deployed
> RHDS already ? Does it worked exactly as you tought it would work 
> based on your tests using FDS ?
>
>    What I''m most concerned with is some potential feature lacking 
in
> RHDS (as FDS seems to be updated more frequently than RHDS and I''m
> testing using the latest FDS version, 1.0.4) compared to FDS, as
I''m
> testing with FDS and would like to deploy RHDS later.
The biggest difference right now is that FDS 1.0.x uses Apache for the 
Admin Server (http engine) instead of NES used in RHDS 7.1.  Aside from 
that, all of the major features are the same.
>
>    Also, if someone from Red Hat is reading this message and would 
> like to comment on this, please, be welcome to give your comments.
>
> Regards,
>
Confidentiality Notice:
The information contained in this electronic message is intended for the
exclusive use of the individual or entity named above and may contain privileged
or confidential information.  If the reader of this message is not the intended
recipient or the employee or agent responsible to deliver it to the intended
recipient, you are hereby notified that dissemination, distribution or copying
of this information is prohibited.  If you have received this communication in
error, please notify the sender immediately by telephone and destroy the copies
you received.

Hello Richard,

Richard Megginson escreveu:
> The biggest difference right now is that FDS 1.0.x uses Apache for the 
> Admin Server (http engine) instead of NES used in RHDS 7.1.  Aside from 
> that, all of the major features are the same.
    Ok, that''s fine. When you say the "biggest difference"
does that
mean that there are others differences other than the one you have 
mentioned above ?

    Also, do you know if there''s some place (a website, a wiki, 
whatever) where I could find a list of these differences, if any ?

Regards,

-- 
André Luís Lopes
andrelop@aw2net.com.br

Hello Aaron,

Bliss, Aaron escreveu:
>>    I would like to ask you something : You wrote that you was in the 
>> same boat I''m now almost one year ago. Since then, have you
deployed
>> RHDS already ? Does it worked exactly as you tought it would work 
>> based on your tests using FDS ?
> 
> No, fds turned out to be very solid, and the community support is great, as
such, we couldn''t justify the cost of rds, especially since to date we
still would not have taken advantage of the paid for support...
    Ok, understood. Good to know that FDS is a solid solution :-) Thanks 
for your answers.

Regards,

-- 
André Luís Lopes
andrelop@aw2net.com.br

I am trying to get a handle on using the alias attribute for OU''s to
set
up something like this:

  ou=posixacct, ou=account, dc=calpers, dc=ca, dc=gov
And have the following ou be an alias to the one I have above
  ou=people, dc=calpers, dc=ca, dc=gov

I thought that if I included ou=posixacct, ou=account, dc=calpers,
dc=ca, dc=gov in the alias attribute of the ou=people this would be
correct.

However I don''t seem to be able to find any users when I do an
ldapsearch of the ou people.  Am I not setting up my ldapsearch
correctly? ldapsearch -x "(&(ou=people)(uid=*))"

I actually think I may not be using the correct syntax for ldapsearch
because a search using ldapsearch -x "(&(ou=posixacct)(uid=*)"
also does
not return any of my uid''s, the most basic ldapsearch does work,
ldapsearch -x uid=*, but that is searching the entire tree...

I could use some assistance in if I setup the alias correctly and what
may be wrong with how I am using ldapsearch.

Thanks

Anderson, Cary wrote:
> I am trying to get a handle on using the alias attribute for OU''s
to set
> up something like this:
>
>   ou=posixacct, ou=account, dc=calpers, dc=ca, dc=gov
> And have the following ou be an alias to the one I have above
>   ou=people, dc=calpers, dc=ca, dc=gov
>
> I thought that if I included ou=posixacct, ou=account, dc=calpers,
> dc=ca, dc=gov in the alias attribute of the ou=people this would be
> correct.
>
> However I don''t seem to be able to find any users when I do an
> ldapsearch of the ou people.  Am I not setting up my ldapsearch
> correctly? ldapsearch -x "(&(ou=people)(uid=*))"
>
> I actually think I may not be using the correct syntax for ldapsearch
> because a search using ldapsearch -x
"(&(ou=posixacct)(uid=*)" also does
> not return any of my uid''s, the most basic ldapsearch does work,
> ldapsearch -x uid=*, but that is searching the entire tree...
>
> I could use some assistance in if I setup the alias correctly and what
> may be wrong with how I am using ldapsearch.
>   
Fedora DS does not support LDAP aliases.  You might want to investigate 
using Virtual Views or smart referrals instead.
> Thanks
>
>
> --
> Fedora-directory-users mailing list
> Fedora-directory-users@redhat.com
> https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-directory-users
>

On 5/25/07, Anderson, Cary <Cary_Anderson@calpers.ca.gov>
wrote:
> I am trying to get a handle on using the alias attribute for OU''s
to set
> up something like this:
>
>   ou=posixacct, ou=account, dc=calpers, dc=ca, dc=gov
> And have the following ou be an alias to the one I have above
>   ou=people, dc=calpers, dc=ca, dc=gov
>
> I thought that if I included ou=posixacct, ou=account, dc=calpers,
> dc=ca, dc=gov in the alias attribute of the ou=people this would be
> correct.
>
> However I don''t seem to be able to find any users when I do an
> ldapsearch of the ou people.  Am I not setting up my ldapsearch
> correctly? ldapsearch -x "(&(ou=people)(uid=*))"
>
> I actually think I may not be using the correct syntax for ldapsearch
> because a search using ldapsearch -x
"(&(ou=posixacct)(uid=*)" also does
> not return any of my uid''s, the most basic ldapsearch does work,
> ldapsearch -x uid=*, but that is searching the entire tree...
>
> I could use some assistance in if I setup the alias correctly and what
> may be wrong with how I am using ldapsearch.
Both your searches are semantically wrong. They are looking for
objects that have attributes ou=something and uid="anything". What you
want to achieve I guess is to look for objects that are under
ou=people branch. You can do that by using extensible matching:
(ou:dn:=people) or (ou:dn:=posixacct). The other (simple) way of doing
this is to set the search base: ldapsearch -x -b "ou=account,
dc=calpers, dc=ca, dc=gov" "(uid=*)"

> Thanks
>
>
> --
> Fedora-directory-users mailing list
> Fedora-directory-users@redhat.com
> https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-directory-users
>