Comments on: The Ubuntu domain controller lives! http://www.wyckedone.net/2008-01-07/the-ubuntu-domain-controller-lives/ si vis pacem, para bellum Fri, 23 Jul 2010 10:54:41 -0400 hourly 1 By: David http://www.wyckedone.net/2008-01-07/the-ubuntu-domain-controller-lives/comment-page-1/#comment-81253 David Sun, 06 Jul 2008 12:18:12 +0000 http://www.wyckedone.net/2008-01-07/the-ubuntu-domain-controller-lives/#comment-81253 could you provide a small operview of the used tutorials you used to configure this? Im especially interested in the domain controller part, thanks in advance could you provide a small operview of the used tutorials you used to configure this?

Im especially interested in the domain controller part, thanks in advance

]]> By: fullmetalashaman http://www.wyckedone.net/2008-01-07/the-ubuntu-domain-controller-lives/comment-page-1/#comment-76692 fullmetalashaman Thu, 10 Jan 2008 23:41:59 +0000 http://www.wyckedone.net/2008-01-07/the-ubuntu-domain-controller-lives/#comment-76692 be·hoove v. tr. To be necessary or proper for: It behooves you at least to try. v. intr. To be necessary or proper. I don't mind not knowing all the tech jargon you write. But I'll be damned if I let you use a word I don't know the meaning of. I'LL BE DAMNED!! :-) be·hoove

v. tr.
To be necessary or proper for: It behooves you at least to try.

v. intr.
To be necessary or proper.

I don’t mind not knowing all the tech jargon you write. But I’ll be damned if I let you use a word I don’t know the meaning of.

I’LL BE DAMNED!!

:-)

]]> By: Rollie http://www.wyckedone.net/2008-01-07/the-ubuntu-domain-controller-lives/comment-page-1/#comment-76179 Rollie Mon, 07 Jan 2008 19:10:37 +0000 http://www.wyckedone.net/2008-01-07/the-ubuntu-domain-controller-lives/#comment-76179 Why not run all these services on it? You mentioned DNS, DHCP, SSH, Samba, and Webmin which implies Apache as well. Windows 2000 and Server 2003 DCs would be running the Windows-equivalent of all of those except I believe IIS. I mean, it IS a domain controller! :) Incidentally, Windows Server 2008 is a totally different story. I thought it was all hype but I can honestly say it is a very different experience. Windows Server 2008 is more like installed RedHat Enterprise Linux in terms of configuration than Windows 2000 in many ways. Why not run all these services on it? You mentioned DNS, DHCP, SSH, Samba, and Webmin which implies Apache as well. Windows 2000 and Server 2003 DCs would be running the Windows-equivalent of all of those except I believe IIS. I mean, it IS a domain controller! :)

Incidentally, Windows Server 2008 is a totally different story. I thought it was all hype but I can honestly say it is a very different experience. Windows Server 2008 is more like installed RedHat Enterprise Linux in terms of configuration than Windows 2000 in many ways.

]]>