List Archives

This forum is an archive of all posts to our mailing list over the past few years. The forum is set read only therefore to contribute you will need to join our list community. See more info about this here.

List Archives

Unanswered Active Topics

Forums Search

Forums >ActiveDir Mail List Archive >List Archives

Subject: [ActiveDir] [OT] introduction

Prev Next

You are not authorized to post a reply.

Page 2 of 2

Author

Messages

deji

Posts:132

05/01/2008 12:31 AM
Even in NT 4.0. joe just wouldn't admit that it was a kludge, even for someone with his expertise. He was always chasing after some errant 1C and 1B (or is it 3x) records that periodically go missing for no reason. Sincerely, _____ (, / \| /) /) /) /---\| (/_ ______ ___// _ // _ ) / \|_/(__(_) // (_(_)(/_(_(_/(__(/_ (_/ /) (/ Microsoft MVP - Directory Services www.akomolafe.name - we know IT -5.75, -3.23 Do you now realize that Today is the Tomorrow you were worried about Yesterday? -anon ________________________________________ From: ActiveDir-owner@mail.activedir.org [ActiveDir-owner@mail.activedir.org] On Behalf Of Darren Mar-Elia [darren@sdmsoftware.com] Sent: Wednesday, April 30, 2008 9:23 PM To: ActiveDir@mail.activedir.org Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] [OT] introduction Brandon- Apparently you never used WINS in NT 3.50... :-) Darren Mar-Elia CTO & Founder SDM Software, Inc. "The Group Policy Experts" www.sdmsoftware.com -----Original Message----- From: "Brandon Shell" <tshell@gmail.com> To: ActiveDir@mail.activedir.org Sent: 4/30/2008 6:53 PM Subject: Re: [ActiveDir] [OT] introduction The suffering point was that DNS is harder to configure, Manage, and troubleshoot than WINS. But I agree... lets move on On Wed, Apr 30, 2008 at 9:43 PM, Akomolafe, Deji <deji@readymaids.com> wrote: > You've completely lost me, and I still don't understand the "suffering" > part of your original statement. And you still haven't explained how MS' > decision to adopt Kerberos was the beginning of your woes, especially since > you just stated that other Kerberos implementations depend on DNS as wellList info : http://www.activedir.org/List.aspx List FAQ : http://www.activedir.org/ListFAQ.aspx List archive: http://www.activedir.org/ma/default.aspx List info : http://www.activedir.org/List.aspx List FAQ : http://www.activedir.org/ListFAQ.aspx List archive: http://www.activedir.org/ma/default.aspx

listmail

Posts:428

05/01/2008 12:56 AM
You realize of course that WINS is simply an implementation of NBNS as per RFC. The only things not RFCed were replication and management interfaces... See RFC1001 (1987) See RFC1002 (1987) I wouldn't recommend trying to infer what people are running based on some of the comments here either; lots of very heavy duty Enterprise experience with devices on networks most folks on this list likely have never seen before and may never see. joe -- O'Reilly Active Directory Third Edition - http://www.joeware.net/win/ad3e.htm -----Original Message----- From: ActiveDir-owner@mail.activedir.org [mailto:ActiveDir-owner@mail.activedir.org] On Behalf Of Michael Miller Sent: Wednesday, April 30, 2008 8:13 PM To: ActiveDir@mail.activedir.org Subject: Re: [ActiveDir] [OT] introduction "IMO we suffer with DNS because MS decided to go with Kerberos. " What? I like standards. I REALLY like standards. I infer you ain't got no boxes running OS X, Unix, Red Hat, Ubuntu that you need to deal with. Last I checked, it was the 21st century. All Windows shops are getting harder to find each day. Welcome Suresh!. Wear your armor when posting here. -mjm Brandon Shell wrote: > IMO we suffer with DNS because MS decided to go with Kerberos. > > On Wed, Apr 30, 2008 at 7:30 PM, joe <listmail@joeware.net > <mailto:listmail@joeware.net>> wrote: > > Only if the whole internet was a single forest and someone would > step up and > be the Department of PC Naming... I would say Gore got at least > that part > right. Go Gore. > > Anyway, IMO... > > internet = dns requirement > intranet != dns requirementΏ] (just real handy in a hetero > environment > ;o) > > > joe > > > > Ώ] Except for the artificial requirement now due to AD. Watch the DNS > queries for and from Windows for AD and tell me honestly that > couldn't have > been done with WINS. You got DNS but machine names still have to be > unique in the Windows forest... Apps still like to use short name > res. No > non-super technical users I have seen are mapping FQDN > server/share names... > > > > -- > O'Reilly Active Directory Third Edition - > http://www.joeware.net/win/ad3e.htm > > > -----Original Message----- > From: ActiveDir-owner@mail.activedir.org > <mailto:ActiveDir-owner@mail.activedir.org> > [mailto:ActiveDir-owner@mail.activedir.org > <mailto:ActiveDir-owner@mail.activedir.org>] On Behalf Of Steve > Schofield > Sent: Wednesday, April 30, 2008 7:21 PM > To: ActiveDir@mail.activedir.org <mailto:ActiveDir@mail.activedir.org> > Subject: Re: [ActiveDir] [OT] introduction > > Too bad Al Gore picked DNS to be the standard vs. WINS when he > invented the > internet. Live would be so much easier. > > Thanks, > > Steve > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "joe" <listmail@joeware.net <mailto:listmail@joeware.net>> > To: <ActiveDir@mail.activedir.org > <mailto:ActiveDir@mail.activedir.org>> > Sent: Wednesday, April 30, 2008 4:35 PM > Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] [OT] introduction > > > > "quick, WINS or DNS, which is better?" > > > > In what way? > > > > 1. Which one has the smaller more tractable code base? > > > > 2. Which one has the fewest documented security exploits against > it in the > > last year? Last 2 years? Last 5 years? > > > > 3. Which one is the simpler to understand? > > > > 4. Which one do most admins not screw up as much? > > > > 5. Which one has more letters in the name? > > > > 6. Which one has more vowels in the name? > > > > 7. Which one helps enforce the idea that you need unique machine > names in > > a > > forest? > > > > > > > > All sorts of categories to rate... ;o) > > > > > > > > -- > > O'Reilly Active Directory Third Edition - > > http://www.joeware.net/win/ad3e.htm > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: ActiveDir-owner@mail.activedir.org > <mailto:ActiveDir-owner@mail.activedir.org> > > [mailto:ActiveDir-owner@mail.activedir.org > <mailto:ActiveDir-owner@mail.activedir.org>] On Behalf Of > Akomolafe, Deji > > Sent: Wednesday, April 30, 2008 3:41 PM > > To: ActiveDir@mail.activedir.org > <mailto:ActiveDir@mail.activedir.org> > > Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] [OT] introduction > > > >>>> I am no longer at Applebee's > > Now, that's Rich IHOP bought Applebees. He hopped over to HP. > Did the > > move increase or decrease his "IO", or is this just a reflection > of his > > bias > > for apples? @j@ > > > > Seriously, what I meant to say was: Welcome Suresh - quick, WINS > or DNS, > > which is better? > > > > Sincerely, > > _____ > > (, / \| /) /) /) > > /---\| (/_ ______ ___// _ // _ > > ) / \|_/(__(_) // (_(_)(/_(_(_/(__(/_ > > (_/ /) > > (/ > > Microsoft MVP - Directory Services > > www.akomolafe.name > <http://www.akomolafe.name/><http://www.akomolafe.name/> - we know > IT -5.75, -3.23 > > Do > > you now realize that Today is the Tomorrow you were worried about > > Yesterday? > > -anon ________________________________ > > From: ActiveDir-owner@mail.activedir.org > <mailto:ActiveDir-owner@mail.activedir.org> > > [ActiveDir-owner@mail.activedir.org > <mailto:ActiveDir-owner@mail.activedir.org>] On Behalf Of Rich Milburn > > [rich.milburn.activedir@gmail.com > <mailto:rich.milburn.activedir@gmail.com>] > > Sent: Wednesday, April 30, 2008 12:18 PM > > To: ActiveDir@mail.activedir.org > <mailto:ActiveDir@mail.activedir.org> > > Subject: [ActiveDir] [OT] introduction > > > > I wanted to send a welcome and introduction for Suresh > Ramchandran, he is > > a > > level 3 directory services engineer at Pfizer, and has just > joined this > > list. He also has quite a bit of knowledge in WINS and DNS. > > > > And PS I am no longer at Applebee's. > > > > Rich Milburn > > AD Technical Consultant > > Hewlett-Packard Company > > (assigned to Pfizer Global Directory Services) > > List info : http://www.activedir.org/List.aspx > > List FAQ : http://www.activedir.org/ListFAQ.aspx > > List archive: http://www.activedir.org/ma/default.aspx > > > > List info : http://www.activedir.org/List.aspx > > List FAQ : http://www.activedir.org/ListFAQ.aspx > > List archive: http://www.activedir.org/ma/default.aspx > > > > > List info : http://www.activedir.org/List.aspx > List FAQ : http://www.activedir.org/ListFAQ.aspx > List archive: http://www.activedir.org/ma/default.aspx > > List info : http://www.activedir.org/List.aspx > List FAQ : http://www.activedir.org/ListFAQ.aspx > List archive: http://www.activedir.org/ma/default.aspx > > List info : http://www.activedir.org/List.aspx List FAQ : http://www.activedir.org/ListFAQ.aspx List archive: http://www.activedir.org/ma/default.aspx List info : http://www.activedir.org/List.aspx List FAQ : http://www.activedir.org/ListFAQ.aspx List archive: http://www.activedir.org/ma/default.aspx

dmitrig

Posts:59

05/01/2008 12:56 AM
Next time you see Brett, please ask him to tell you a story about WINS and ESENT cache. -----Original Message----- From: ActiveDir-owner@mail.activedir.org [mailto:ActiveDir-owner@mail.activedir.org] On Behalf Of Akomolafe, Deji Sent: Wednesday, April 30, 2008 9:29 PM To: ActiveDir@mail.activedir.org Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] [OT] introduction Even in NT 4.0. joe just wouldn't admit that it was a kludge, even for someone with his expertise. He was always chasing after some errant 1C and 1B (or is it 3x) records that periodically go missing for no reason. Sincerely, _____ (, / \| /) /) /) /---\| (/_ ______ ___// _ // _ ) / \|_/(__(_) // (_(_)(/_(_(_/(__(/_ (_/ /) (/ Microsoft MVP - Directory Services www.akomolafe.name - we know IT -5.75, -3.23 Do you now realize that Today is the Tomorrow you were worried about Yesterday? -anon ________________________________________ From: ActiveDir-owner@mail.activedir.org [ActiveDir-owner@mail.activedir.org] On Behalf Of Darren Mar-Elia [darren@sdmsoftware.com] Sent: Wednesday, April 30, 2008 9:23 PM To: ActiveDir@mail.activedir.org Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] [OT] introduction Brandon- Apparently you never used WINS in NT 3.50... :-) Darren Mar-Elia CTO & Founder SDM Software, Inc. "The Group Policy Experts" www.sdmsoftware.com -----Original Message----- From: "Brandon Shell" <tshell@gmail.com> To: ActiveDir@mail.activedir.org Sent: 4/30/2008 6:53 PM Subject: Re: [ActiveDir] [OT] introduction The suffering point was that DNS is harder to configure, Manage, and troubleshoot than WINS. But I agree... lets move on On Wed, Apr 30, 2008 at 9:43 PM, Akomolafe, Deji <deji@readymaids.com> wrote: > You've completely lost me, and I still don't understand the "suffering" > part of your original statement. And you still haven't explained how MS' > decision to adopt Kerberos was the beginning of your woes, especially since > you just stated that other Kerberos implementations depend on DNS as wellList info : http://www.activedir.org/List.aspx List FAQ : http://www.activedir.org/ListFAQ.aspx List archive: http://www.activedir.org/ma/default.aspx List info : http://www.activedir.org/List.aspx List FAQ : http://www.activedir.org/ListFAQ.aspx List archive: http://www.activedir.org/ma/default.aspx List info : http://www.activedir.org/List.aspx List FAQ : http://www.activedir.org/ListFAQ.aspx List archive: http://www.activedir.org/ma/default.aspx

listmail

Posts:428

05/01/2008 1:11 AM
Maybe because you are recalling this poorly Deji. I wasn't always chasing errant 1C/1B records, I wasn't ever chasing errant 1B/1C records but then you weren't involved in the Enterprise domain stuff where we worked, you worked on resource dp,aom servers. We occasionally has Samba boxes hijacking 1C records and I had a script that monitored that so when it happened we had it fixed in very short order. Outside of that the biggest issue was "admins" miscofiguring servers to either not point at the proper WINS servers or loading and running the WINS Service on them. Got to the point where when someone would call with a WINS issue my team would first check the member server in question to make sure it was configured properly and it usually wasn't. Didn't matter how many times we tried to explain you couldn't configure WINS on a server than then point it at another WINS server for name res and have it work properly. WINS worked very well for us on NT4. Possibly it was simply the quality of the admins running it. -- O'Reilly Active Directory Third Edition - http://www.joeware.net/win/ad3e.htm -----Original Message----- From: ActiveDir-owner@mail.activedir.org [mailto:ActiveDir-owner@mail.activedir.org] On Behalf Of Akomolafe, Deji Sent: Thursday, May 01, 2008 12:29 AM To: ActiveDir@mail.activedir.org Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] [OT] introduction Even in NT 4.0. joe just wouldn't admit that it was a kludge, even for someone with his expertise. He was always chasing after some errant 1C and 1B (or is it 3x) records that periodically go missing for no reason. Sincerely, _____ (, / \| /) /) /) /---\| (/_ ______ ___// _ // _ ) / \|_/(__(_) // (_(_)(/_(_(_/(__(/_ (_/ /) (/ Microsoft MVP - Directory Services www.akomolafe.name - we know IT -5.75, -3.23 Do you now realize that Today is the Tomorrow you were worried about Yesterday? -anon ________________________________________ From: ActiveDir-owner@mail.activedir.org [ActiveDir-owner@mail.activedir.org] On Behalf Of Darren Mar-Elia [darren@sdmsoftware.com] Sent: Wednesday, April 30, 2008 9:23 PM To: ActiveDir@mail.activedir.org Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] [OT] introduction Brandon- Apparently you never used WINS in NT 3.50... :-) Darren Mar-Elia CTO & Founder SDM Software, Inc. "The Group Policy Experts" www.sdmsoftware.com -----Original Message----- From: "Brandon Shell" <tshell@gmail.com> To: ActiveDir@mail.activedir.org Sent: 4/30/2008 6:53 PM Subject: Re: [ActiveDir] [OT] introduction The suffering point was that DNS is harder to configure, Manage, and troubleshoot than WINS. But I agree... lets move on On Wed, Apr 30, 2008 at 9:43 PM, Akomolafe, Deji <deji@readymaids.com> wrote: > You've completely lost me, and I still don't understand the "suffering" > part of your original statement. And you still haven't explained how MS' > decision to adopt Kerberos was the beginning of your woes, especially since > you just stated that other Kerberos implementations depend on DNS as wellList info : http://www.activedir.org/List.aspx List FAQ : http://www.activedir.org/ListFAQ.aspx List archive: http://www.activedir.org/ma/default.aspx List info : http://www.activedir.org/List.aspx List FAQ : http://www.activedir.org/ListFAQ.aspx List archive: http://www.activedir.org/ma/default.aspx List info : http://www.activedir.org/List.aspx List FAQ : http://www.activedir.org/ListFAQ.aspx List archive: http://www.activedir.org/ma/default.aspx

deji

Posts:132

05/01/2008 1:21 AM
Did I just hear you say "DNS worked very well for us on NT4 (and beyond). Possibly it was simply the quality of the admins running it"? Does that mean you are going to stop dumping on DNS now? Sincerely, _____ (, / \| /) /) /) /---\| (/_ ______ ___// _ // _ ) / \|_/(__(_) // (_(_)(/_(_(_/(__(/_ (_/ /) (/ Microsoft MVP - Directory Services www.akomolafe.name - we know IT -5.75, -3.23 Do you now realize that Today is the Tomorrow you were worried about Yesterday? -anon ________________________________________ From: ActiveDir-owner@mail.activedir.org [ActiveDir-owner@mail.activedir.org] On Behalf Of joe [listmail@joeware.net] Sent: Wednesday, April 30, 2008 10:09 PM To: ActiveDir@mail.activedir.org Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] [OT] introduction Maybe because you are recalling this poorly Deji. I wasn't always chasing errant 1C/1B records, I wasn't ever chasing errant 1B/1C records but then you weren't involved in the Enterprise domain stuff where we worked, you worked on resource dp,aom servers. We occasionally has Samba boxes hijacking 1C records and I had a script that monitored that so when it happened we had it fixed in very short order. Outside of that the biggest issue was "admins" miscofiguring servers to either not point at the proper WINS servers or loading and running the WINS Service on them. Got to the point where when someone would call with a WINS issue my team would first check the member server in question to make sure it was configured properly and it usually wasn't. Didn't matter how many times we tried to explain you couldn't configure WINS on a server than then point it at another WINS server for name res and have it work properly. WINS worked very well for us on NT4. Possibly it was simply the quality of the admins running it. -- O'Reilly Active Directory Third Edition - http://www.joeware.net/win/ad3e.htm -----Original Message----- From: ActiveDir-owner@mail.activedir.org [mailto:ActiveDir-owner@mail.activedir.org] On Behalf Of Akomolafe, Deji Sent: Thursday, May 01, 2008 12:29 AM To: ActiveDir@mail.activedir.org Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] [OT] introduction Even in NT 4.0. joe just wouldn't admit that it was a kludge, even for someone with his expertise. He was always chasing after some errant 1C and 1B (or is it 3x) records that periodically go missing for no reason. Sincerely, _____ (, / \| /) /) /) /---\| (/_ ______ ___// _ // _ ) / \|_/(__(_) // (_(_)(/_(_(_/(__(/_ (_/ /) (/ Microsoft MVP - Directory Services www.akomolafe.name - we know IT -5.75, -3.23 Do you now realize that Today is the Tomorrow you were worried about Yesterday? -anon ________________________________________ From: ActiveDir-owner@mail.activedir.org [ActiveDir-owner@mail.activedir.org] On Behalf Of Darren Mar-Elia [darren@sdmsoftware.com] Sent: Wednesday, April 30, 2008 9:23 PM To: ActiveDir@mail.activedir.org Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] [OT] introduction Brandon- Apparently you never used WINS in NT 3.50... :-) Darren Mar-Elia CTO & Founder SDM Software, Inc. "The Group Policy Experts" www.sdmsoftware.com -----Original Message----- From: "Brandon Shell" <tshell@gmail.com> To: ActiveDir@mail.activedir.org Sent: 4/30/2008 6:53 PM Subject: Re: [ActiveDir] [OT] introduction The suffering point was that DNS is harder to configure, Manage, and troubleshoot than WINS. But I agree... lets move on On Wed, Apr 30, 2008 at 9:43 PM, Akomolafe, Deji <deji@readymaids.com> wrote: > You've completely lost me, and I still don't understand the "suffering" > part of your original statement. And you still haven't explained how MS' > decision to adopt Kerberos was the beginning of your woes, especially since > you just stated that other Kerberos implementations depend on DNS as wellList info : http://www.activedir.org/List.aspx List FAQ : http://www.activedir.org/ListFAQ.aspx List archive: http://www.activedir.org/ma/default.aspx List info : http://www.activedir.org/List.aspx List FAQ : http://www.activedir.org/ListFAQ.aspx List archive: http://www.activedir.org/ma/default.aspx List info : http://www.activedir.org/List.aspx List FAQ : http://www.activedir.org/ListFAQ.aspx List archive: http://www.activedir.org/ma/default.aspx List info : http://www.activedir.org/List.aspx List FAQ : http://www.activedir.org/ListFAQ.aspx List archive: http://www.activedir.org/ma/default.aspx

bsonposh

Posts:167

05/01/2008 7:24 AM
I have to admit... I didnt do much in NT 3.5, but on the flip side DNS wasnt so hot back then either On Thu, May 1, 2008 at 12:23 AM, Darren Mar-Elia <darren@sdmsoftware.com> wrote: > Brandon- > > Apparently you never used WINS in NT 3.50... :-) > > Darren Mar-Elia > CTO & Founder > SDM Software, Inc. > "The Group Policy Experts" > www.sdmsoftware.com > > -----Original Message----- > From: "Brandon Shell" <tshell@gmail.com> > To: ActiveDir@mail.activedir.org > Sent: 4/30/2008 6:53 PM > Subject: Re: [ActiveDir] [OT] introduction > > The suffering point was that DNS is harder to configure, Manage, and > troubleshoot than WINS. > > But I agree... lets move on > > On Wed, Apr 30, 2008 at 9:43 PM, Akomolafe, Deji <deji@readymaids.com> > wrote: > > > You've completely lost me, and I still don't understand the "suffering" > > part of your original statement. And you still haven't explained how MS' > > decision to adopt Kerberos was the beginning of your woes, especially > since > > you just stated that other Kerberos implementations depend on DNS as > wellList info : http://www.activedir.org/List.aspx > List FAQ : http://www.activedir.org/ListFAQ.aspx > List archive: http://www.activedir.org/ma/default.aspx >

listmail

Posts:428

05/01/2008 9:20 AM
You know we didn't run Windows DNS at all. We needed functionality that MSFT didn't put in because they thought they knew what we were doing... -- O'Reilly Active Directory Third Edition - http://www.joeware.net/win/ad3e.htm -----Original Message----- From: ActiveDir-owner@mail.activedir.org [mailto:ActiveDir-owner@mail.activedir.org] On Behalf Of Akomolafe, Deji Sent: Thursday, May 01, 2008 1:17 AM To: ActiveDir@mail.activedir.org Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] [OT] introduction Did I just hear you say "DNS worked very well for us on NT4 (and beyond). Possibly it was simply the quality of the admins running it"? Does that mean you are going to stop dumping on DNS now? Sincerely, _____ (, / \| /) /) /) /---\| (/_ ______ ___// _ // _ ) / \|_/(__(_) // (_(_)(/_(_(_/(__(/_ (_/ /) (/ Microsoft MVP - Directory Services www.akomolafe.name - we know IT -5.75, -3.23 Do you now realize that Today is the Tomorrow you were worried about Yesterday? -anon ________________________________________ From: ActiveDir-owner@mail.activedir.org [ActiveDir-owner@mail.activedir.org] On Behalf Of joe [listmail@joeware.net] Sent: Wednesday, April 30, 2008 10:09 PM To: ActiveDir@mail.activedir.org Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] [OT] introduction Maybe because you are recalling this poorly Deji. I wasn't always chasing errant 1C/1B records, I wasn't ever chasing errant 1B/1C records but then you weren't involved in the Enterprise domain stuff where we worked, you worked on resource dp,aom servers. We occasionally has Samba boxes hijacking 1C records and I had a script that monitored that so when it happened we had it fixed in very short order. Outside of that the biggest issue was "admins" miscofiguring servers to either not point at the proper WINS servers or loading and running the WINS Service on them. Got to the point where when someone would call with a WINS issue my team would first check the member server in question to make sure it was configured properly and it usually wasn't. Didn't matter how many times we tried to explain you couldn't configure WINS on a server than then point it at another WINS server for name res and have it work properly. WINS worked very well for us on NT4. Possibly it was simply the quality of the admins running it. -- O'Reilly Active Directory Third Edition - http://www.joeware.net/win/ad3e.htm -----Original Message----- From: ActiveDir-owner@mail.activedir.org [mailto:ActiveDir-owner@mail.activedir.org] On Behalf Of Akomolafe, Deji Sent: Thursday, May 01, 2008 12:29 AM To: ActiveDir@mail.activedir.org Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] [OT] introduction Even in NT 4.0. joe just wouldn't admit that it was a kludge, even for someone with his expertise. He was always chasing after some errant 1C and 1B (or is it 3x) records that periodically go missing for no reason. Sincerely, _____ (, / \| /) /) /) /---\| (/_ ______ ___// _ // _ ) / \|_/(__(_) // (_(_)(/_(_(_/(__(/_ (_/ /) (/ Microsoft MVP - Directory Services www.akomolafe.name - we know IT -5.75, -3.23 Do you now realize that Today is the Tomorrow you were worried about Yesterday? -anon ________________________________________ From: ActiveDir-owner@mail.activedir.org [ActiveDir-owner@mail.activedir.org] On Behalf Of Darren Mar-Elia [darren@sdmsoftware.com] Sent: Wednesday, April 30, 2008 9:23 PM To: ActiveDir@mail.activedir.org Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] [OT] introduction Brandon- Apparently you never used WINS in NT 3.50... :-) Darren Mar-Elia CTO & Founder SDM Software, Inc. "The Group Policy Experts" www.sdmsoftware.com -----Original Message----- From: "Brandon Shell" <tshell@gmail.com> To: ActiveDir@mail.activedir.org Sent: 4/30/2008 6:53 PM Subject: Re: [ActiveDir] [OT] introduction The suffering point was that DNS is harder to configure, Manage, and troubleshoot than WINS. But I agree... lets move on On Wed, Apr 30, 2008 at 9:43 PM, Akomolafe, Deji <deji@readymaids.com> wrote: > You've completely lost me, and I still don't understand the "suffering" > part of your original statement. And you still haven't explained how MS' > decision to adopt Kerberos was the beginning of your woes, especially since > you just stated that other Kerberos implementations depend on DNS as wellList info : http://www.activedir.org/List.aspx List FAQ : http://www.activedir.org/ListFAQ.aspx List archive: http://www.activedir.org/ma/default.aspx List info : http://www.activedir.org/List.aspx List FAQ : http://www.activedir.org/ListFAQ.aspx List archive: http://www.activedir.org/ma/default.aspx List info : http://www.activedir.org/List.aspx List FAQ : http://www.activedir.org/ListFAQ.aspx List archive: http://www.activedir.org/ma/default.aspx List info : http://www.activedir.org/List.aspx List FAQ : http://www.activedir.org/ListFAQ.aspx List archive: http://www.activedir.org/ma/default.aspx List info : http://www.activedir.org/List.aspx List FAQ : http://www.activedir.org/ListFAQ.aspx List archive: http://www.activedir.org/ma/default.aspx

listmail

Posts:428

05/01/2008 9:40 AM
"I have to admit... I didnt do much in NT 3.5" It didn't have PoSΏ] so he didn't know how to do anything... Or maybe he was moping... ;o) joe P.S. Not sure if Brandon owned up to it on the list yet, but I will "out" him and say he is a PoS MVP... Here is his blog - http://bsonposh.com/modules/wordpress/ It is actually fairly interesting stuff if you are working with PowerShell. However, don't expect the "About" page to be updated from "This is an example of a Wordpress page..." until WordPress comes out with a PoS provider... So, in other words... not anytime soon. Ώ] This would be PowerShell. PS won't work, that has other more important meaning and well PoSh... this is PoSh -> http://www.jossip.com/gossip/Victoria%20Beckham%20--%20super%20skinny%20-%20 lg%20rec.jpg and that is just way better than any command line thing. -- O'Reilly Active Directory Third Edition - http://www.joeware.net/win/ad3e.htm _____ From: ActiveDir-owner@mail.activedir.org [mailto:ActiveDir-owner@mail.activedir.org] On Behalf Of Brandon Shell Sent: Thursday, May 01, 2008 7:22 AM To: ActiveDir@mail.activedir.org Subject: Re: [ActiveDir] [OT] introduction I have to admit... I didnt do much in NT 3.5, but on the flip side DNS wasnt so hot back then either On Thu, May 1, 2008 at 12:23 AM, Darren Mar-Elia <darren@sdmsoftware.com> wrote: Brandon- Apparently you never used WINS in NT 3.50... :-) Darren Mar-Elia CTO & Founder SDM Software, Inc. "The Group Policy Experts" www.sdmsoftware.com <http://www.sdmsoftware.com/> -----Original Message----- From: "Brandon Shell" <tshell@gmail.com> To: ActiveDir@mail.activedir.org Sent: 4/30/2008 6:53 PM Subject: Re: [ActiveDir] [OT] introduction The suffering point was that DNS is harder to configure, Manage, and troubleshoot than WINS. But I agree... lets move on On Wed, Apr 30, 2008 at 9:43 PM, Akomolafe, Deji <deji@readymaids.com> wrote: > You've completely lost me, and I still don't understand the "suffering" > part of your original statement. And you still haven't explained how MS' > decision to adopt Kerberos was the beginning of your woes, especially since > you just stated that other Kerberos implementations depend on DNS as wellList info : http://www.activedir.org/List.aspx List FAQ : http://www.activedir.org/ListFAQ.aspx List archive: http://www.activedir.org/ma/default.aspx

bsonposh

Posts:167

05/01/2008 9:56 AM
DOH! Outted by joe. Anyway... its true, I am Powershell guy. btw... I didnt even know I had an about page (that has now been updated ) On Thu, May 1, 2008 at 9:36 AM, joe <listmail@joeware.net> wrote: > "I have to admit... I didnt do much in NT 3.5" > > It didn't have PoSΏ] so he didn't know how to do anything... Or maybe he > was moping... > > ;o) > > joe > > > P.S. Not sure if Brandon owned up to it on the list yet, but I will "out" > him and say he is a PoS MVP... Here is his blog - > http://bsonposh.com/modules/wordpress/ It is actually fairly interesting > stuff if you are working with PowerShell. However, don't expect the "About" > page to be updated from "This is an example of a Wordpress page..." until > WordPress comes out with a PoS provider... So, in other words... not anytime > soon. > > > Ώ] This would be PowerShell. PS won't work, that has other more important > meaning and well PoSh... this is PoSh -> > http://www.jossip.com/gossip/Victoria%20Beckham%20--%20super%20skinny%20-%20lg%20rec.jpg and > that is just way better than any command line thing. > > > > -- > O'Reilly Active Directory Third Edition - > http://www.joeware.net/win/ad3e.htm > > > > ------------------------------ > From: ActiveDir-owner@mail.activedir.org [mailto: > ActiveDir-owner@mail.activedir.org] On Behalf Of Brandon Shell > Sent: Thursday, May 01, 2008 7:22 AM > To: ActiveDir@mail.activedir.org > Subject: Re: [ActiveDir] [OT] introduction > > I have to admit... I didnt do much in NT 3.5, but on the flip side DNS > wasnt so hot back then either > > On Thu, May 1, 2008 at 12:23 AM, Darren Mar-Elia <darren@sdmsoftware.com> > wrote: > > > Brandon- > > > > Apparently you never used WINS in NT 3.50... :-) > > > > Darren Mar-Elia > > CTO & Founder > > SDM Software, Inc. > > "The Group Policy Experts" > > www.sdmsoftware.com > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: "Brandon Shell" <tshell@gmail.com> > > To: ActiveDir@mail.activedir.org > > Sent: 4/30/2008 6:53 PM > > Subject: Re: [ActiveDir] [OT] introduction > > > > The suffering point was that DNS is harder to configure, Manage, and > > troubleshoot than WINS. > > > > But I agree... lets move on > > > > On Wed, Apr 30, 2008 at 9:43 PM, Akomolafe, Deji <deji@readymaids.com> > > wrote: > > > > > You've completely lost me, and I still don't understand the > > "suffering" > > > part of your original statement. And you still haven't explained how > > MS' > > > decision to adopt Kerberos was the beginning of your woes, especially > > since > > > you just stated that other Kerberos implementations depend on DNS as > > wellList info : http://www.activedir.org/List.aspx > > List FAQ : http://www.activedir.org/ListFAQ.aspx > > List archive: http://www.activedir.org/ma/default.aspx > > > >

deji

Posts:132

05/01/2008 10:26 AM
You cleverly side-stepped the question, joe. If you truly believe that the health of a WINS implementation is directly proportional to the "quality" of its implementor/administrator, then is it not logical to assume the same of DNS? Sincerely, _____ (, / \| /) /) /) /---\| (/_ ______ ___// _ // _ ) / \|_/(__(_) // (_(_)(/_(_(_/(__(/_ (_/ /) (/ Microsoft MVP - Directory Services www.akomolafe.name - we know IT -5.75, -3.23 Do you now realize that Today is the Tomorrow you were worried about Yesterday? -anon ________________________________________ From: ActiveDir-owner@mail.activedir.org [ActiveDir-owner@mail.activedir.org] On Behalf Of joe [listmail@joeware.net] Sent: Thursday, May 01, 2008 6:20 AM To: ActiveDir@mail.activedir.org Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] [OT] introduction You know we didn't run Windows DNS at all. We needed functionality that MSFT didn't put in because they thought they knew what we were doing... -- O'Reilly Active Directory Third Edition - http://www.joeware.net/win/ad3e.htm -----Original Message----- From: ActiveDir-owner@mail.activedir.org [mailto:ActiveDir-owner@mail.activedir.org] On Behalf Of Akomolafe, Deji Sent: Thursday, May 01, 2008 1:17 AM To: ActiveDir@mail.activedir.org Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] [OT] introduction Did I just hear you say "DNS worked very well for us on NT4 (and beyond). Possibly it was simply the quality of the admins running it"? Does that mean you are going to stop dumping on DNS now? Sincerely, _____ (, / \| /) /) /) /---\| (/_ ______ ___// _ // _ ) / \|_/(__(_) // (_(_)(/_(_(_/(__(/_ (_/ /) (/ Microsoft MVP - Directory Services www.akomolafe.name - we know IT -5.75, -3.23 Do you now realize that Today is the Tomorrow you were worried about Yesterday? -anon ________________________________________ From: ActiveDir-owner@mail.activedir.org [ActiveDir-owner@mail.activedir.org] On Behalf Of joe [listmail@joeware.net] Sent: Wednesday, April 30, 2008 10:09 PM To: ActiveDir@mail.activedir.org Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] [OT] introduction Maybe because you are recalling this poorly Deji. I wasn't always chasing errant 1C/1B records, I wasn't ever chasing errant 1B/1C records but then you weren't involved in the Enterprise domain stuff where we worked, you worked on resource dp,aom servers. We occasionally has Samba boxes hijacking 1C records and I had a script that monitored that so when it happened we had it fixed in very short order. Outside of that the biggest issue was "admins" miscofiguring servers to either not point at the proper WINS servers or loading and running the WINS Service on them. Got to the point where when someone would call with a WINS issue my team would first check the member server in question to make sure it was configured properly and it usually wasn't. Didn't matter how many times we tried to explain you couldn't configure WINS on a server than then point it at another WINS server for name res and have it work properly. WINS worked very well for us on NT4. Possibly it was simply the quality of the admins running it. -- O'Reilly Active Directory Third Edition - http://www.joeware.net/win/ad3e.htm -----Original Message----- From: ActiveDir-owner@mail.activedir.org [mailto:ActiveDir-owner@mail.activedir.org] On Behalf Of Akomolafe, Deji Sent: Thursday, May 01, 2008 12:29 AM To: ActiveDir@mail.activedir.org Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] [OT] introduction Even in NT 4.0. joe just wouldn't admit that it was a kludge, even for someone with his expertise. He was always chasing after some errant 1C and 1B (or is it 3x) records that periodically go missing for no reason. Sincerely, _____ (, / \| /) /) /) /---\| (/_ ______ ___// _ // _ ) / \|_/(__(_) // (_(_)(/_(_(_/(__(/_ (_/ /) (/ Microsoft MVP - Directory Services www.akomolafe.name - we know IT -5.75, -3.23 Do you now realize that Today is the Tomorrow you were worried about Yesterday? -anon ________________________________________ From: ActiveDir-owner@mail.activedir.org [ActiveDir-owner@mail.activedir.org] On Behalf Of Darren Mar-Elia [darren@sdmsoftware.com] Sent: Wednesday, April 30, 2008 9:23 PM To: ActiveDir@mail.activedir.org Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] [OT] introduction Brandon- Apparently you never used WINS in NT 3.50... :-) Darren Mar-Elia CTO & Founder SDM Software, Inc. "The Group Policy Experts" www.sdmsoftware.com -----Original Message----- From: "Brandon Shell" <tshell@gmail.com> To: ActiveDir@mail.activedir.org Sent: 4/30/2008 6:53 PM Subject: Re: [ActiveDir] [OT] introduction The suffering point was that DNS is harder to configure, Manage, and troubleshoot than WINS. But I agree... lets move on On Wed, Apr 30, 2008 at 9:43 PM, Akomolafe, Deji <deji@readymaids.com> wrote: > You've completely lost me, and I still don't understand the "suffering" > part of your original statement. And you still haven't explained how MS' > decision to adopt Kerberos was the beginning of your woes, especially since > you just stated that other Kerberos implementations depend on DNS as wellList info : http://www.activedir.org/List.aspx List FAQ : http://www.activedir.org/ListFAQ.aspx List archive: http://www.activedir.org/ma/default.aspx List info : http://www.activedir.org/List.aspx List FAQ : http://www.activedir.org/ListFAQ.aspx List archive: http://www.activedir.org/ma/default.aspx List info : http://www.activedir.org/List.aspx List FAQ : http://www.activedir.org/ListFAQ.aspx List archive: http://www.activedir.org/ma/default.aspx List info : http://www.activedir.org/List.aspx List FAQ : http://www.activedir.org/ListFAQ.aspx List archive: http://www.activedir.org/ma/default.aspx List info : http://www.activedir.org/List.aspx List FAQ : http://www.activedir.org/ListFAQ.aspx List archive: http://www.activedir.org/ma/default.aspx List info : http://www.activedir.org/List.aspx List FAQ : http://www.activedir.org/ListFAQ.aspx List archive: http://www.activedir.org/ma/default.aspx

bsonposh

Posts:167

05/01/2008 10:31 AM
I personally want to apologize to Rich for our shameless hijacking of his thread <me>points finger squarely at Deji</me> On Thu, May 1, 2008 at 10:21 AM, Akomolafe, Deji <deji@readymaids.com> wrote: > You cleverly side-stepped the question, joe. > > If you truly believe that the health of a WINS implementation is directly > proportional to the "quality" of its implementor/administrator, then is it > not logical to assume the same of DNS? > > Sincerely, > _____ > (, / \| /) /) /) > /---\| (/_ ______ ___// _ // _ > ) / \|_/(__(_) // (_(_)(/_(_(_/(__(/_ > (_/ /) > (/ > Microsoft MVP - Directory Services > www.akomolafe.name - we know IT > -5.75, -3.23 > Do you now realize that Today is the Tomorrow you were worried about > Yesterday? -anon > ________________________________________ > From: ActiveDir-owner@mail.activedir.org [ > ActiveDir-owner@mail.activedir.org] On Behalf Of joe [listmail@joeware.net > ] > Sent: Thursday, May 01, 2008 6:20 AM > To: ActiveDir@mail.activedir.org > Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] [OT] introduction > > You know we didn't run Windows DNS at all. We needed functionality that > MSFT > didn't put in because they thought they knew what we were doing... > > > -- > O'Reilly Active Directory Third Edition - > http://www.joeware.net/win/ad3e.htm > > > -----Original Message----- > From: ActiveDir-owner@mail.activedir.org > [mailto:ActiveDir-owner@mail.activedir.org] On Behalf Of Akomolafe, Deji > Sent: Thursday, May 01, 2008 1:17 AM > To: ActiveDir@mail.activedir.org > Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] [OT] introduction > > Did I just hear you say "DNS worked very well for us on NT4 (and beyond). > Possibly it was simply the quality of the admins running it"? > > Does that mean you are going to stop dumping on DNS now? > > > Sincerely, > _____ > (, / \| /) /) /) > /---\| (/_ ______ ___// _ // _ > ) / \|_/(__(_) // (_(_)(/_(_(_/(__(/_ > (_/ /) > (/ > Microsoft MVP - Directory Services > www.akomolafe.name - we know IT > -5.75, -3.23 > Do you now realize that Today is the Tomorrow you were worried about > Yesterday? -anon ________________________________________ > From: ActiveDir-owner@mail.activedir.org > [ActiveDir-owner@mail.activedir.org] On Behalf Of joe [ > listmail@joeware.net] > Sent: Wednesday, April 30, 2008 10:09 PM > To: ActiveDir@mail.activedir.org > Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] [OT] introduction > > Maybe because you are recalling this poorly Deji. > > I wasn't always chasing errant 1C/1B records, I wasn't ever chasing errant > 1B/1C records but then you weren't involved in the Enterprise domain stuff > where we worked, you worked on resource dp,aom servers. We occasionally > has > Samba boxes hijacking 1C records and I had a script that monitored that so > when it happened we had it fixed in very short order. Outside of that the > biggest issue was "admins" miscofiguring servers to either not point at > the > proper WINS servers or loading and running the WINS Service on them. Got > to > the point where when someone would call with a WINS issue my team would > first check the member server in question to make sure it was configured > properly and it usually wasn't. Didn't matter how many times we tried to > explain you couldn't configure WINS on a server than then point it at > another WINS server for name res and have it work properly. > > WINS worked very well for us on NT4. Possibly it was simply the quality of > the admins running it. > > > > -- > O'Reilly Active Directory Third Edition - > http://www.joeware.net/win/ad3e.htm > > > -----Original Message----- > From: ActiveDir-owner@mail.activedir.org > [mailto:ActiveDir-owner@mail.activedir.org] On Behalf Of Akomolafe, Deji > Sent: Thursday, May 01, 2008 12:29 AM > To: ActiveDir@mail.activedir.org > Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] [OT] introduction > > Even in NT 4.0. joe just wouldn't admit that it was a kludge, even for > someone with his expertise. He was always chasing after some errant 1C and > 1B (or is it 3x) records that periodically go missing for no reason. > > Sincerely, > _____ > (, / \| /) /) /) > /---\| (/_ ______ ___// _ // _ > ) / \|_/(__(_) // (_(_)(/_(_(_/(__(/_ > (_/ /) > (/ > Microsoft MVP - Directory Services > www.akomolafe.name - we know IT > -5.75, -3.23 > Do you now realize that Today is the Tomorrow you were worried about > Yesterday? -anon ________________________________________ > From: ActiveDir-owner@mail.activedir.org > [ActiveDir-owner@mail.activedir.org] On Behalf Of Darren Mar-Elia > [darren@sdmsoftware.com] > Sent: Wednesday, April 30, 2008 9:23 PM > To: ActiveDir@mail.activedir.org > Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] [OT] introduction > > Brandon- > > Apparently you never used WINS in NT 3.50... :-) > > Darren Mar-Elia > CTO & Founder > SDM Software, Inc. > "The Group Policy Experts" > www.sdmsoftware.com > > -----Original Message----- > From: "Brandon Shell" <tshell@gmail.com> > To: ActiveDir@mail.activedir.org > Sent: 4/30/2008 6:53 PM > Subject: Re: [ActiveDir] [OT] introduction > > The suffering point was that DNS is harder to configure, Manage, and > troubleshoot than WINS. > > But I agree... lets move on > > On Wed, Apr 30, 2008 at 9:43 PM, Akomolafe, Deji <deji@readymaids.com> > wrote: > > > You've completely lost me, and I still don't understand the "suffering" > > part of your original statement. And you still haven't explained how MS' > > decision to adopt Kerberos was the beginning of your woes, especially > since > > you just stated that other Kerberos implementations depend on DNS as > wellList info : http://www.activedir.org/List.aspx > List FAQ : http://www.activedir.org/ListFAQ.aspx > List archive: http://www.activedir.org/ma/default.aspx > List info : http://www.activedir.org/List.aspx > List FAQ : http://www.activedir.org/ListFAQ.aspx > List archive: http://www.activedir.org/ma/default.aspx > > List info : http://www.activedir.org/List.aspx > List FAQ : http://www.activedir.org/ListFAQ.aspx > List archive: http://www.activedir.org/ma/default.aspx > List info : http://www.activedir.org/List.aspx > List FAQ : http://www.activedir.org/ListFAQ.aspx > List archive: http://www.activedir.org/ma/default.aspx > > List info : http://www.activedir.org/List.aspx > List FAQ : http://www.activedir.org/ListFAQ.aspx > List archive: http://www.activedir.org/ma/default.aspx > List info : http://www.activedir.org/List.aspx > List FAQ : http://www.activedir.org/ListFAQ.aspx > List archive: http://www.activedir.org/ma/default.aspx >

deji

Posts:132

05/01/2008 10:56 AM
You call this Hijacking? Rich is the master of hijacking, so I'm just trying to be like himΏ] Ώ]says the Unknown Guy w/ Rich :0) Sincerely, _____ (, / \| /) /) /) /---\| (/_ ______ ___// _ // _ ) / \|_/(__(_) // (_(_)(/_(_(_/(__(/_ (_/ /) (/ Microsoft MVP - Directory Services www.akomolafe.name<http://www.akomolafe.name/> - we know IT -5.75, -3.23 Do you now realize that Today is the Tomorrow you were worried about Yesterday? -anon ________________________________ From: ActiveDir-owner@mail.activedir.org [ActiveDir-owner@mail.activedir.org] On Behalf Of Brandon Shell [tshell@gmail.com] Sent: Thursday, May 01, 2008 7:26 AM To: ActiveDir@mail.activedir.org Subject: Re: [ActiveDir] [OT] introduction I personally want to apologize to Rich for our shameless hijacking of his thread <me>points finger squarely at Deji</me> On Thu, May 1, 2008 at 10:21 AM, Akomolafe, Deji <deji@readymaids.com<mailto:deji@readymaids.com>> wrote: You cleverly side-stepped the question, joe. If you truly believe that the health of a WINS implementation is directly proportional to the "quality" of its implementor/administrator, then is it not logical to assume the same of DNS? Sincerely, _____ (, / \| /) /) /) /---\| (/_ ______ ___// _ // _ ) / \|_/(__(_) // (_(_)(/_(_(_/(__(/_ (_/ /) (/ Microsoft MVP - Directory Services www.akomolafe.name<http://www.akomolafe.name/> - we know IT -5.75, -3.23 Do you now realize that Today is the Tomorrow you were worried about Yesterday? -anon ________________________________________ From: ActiveDir-owner@mail.activedir.org<mailto:ActiveDir-owner@mail.activedir.org> [ActiveDir-owner@mail.activedir.org<mailto:ActiveDir-owner@mail.activedir.org>] On Behalf Of joe [listmail@joeware.net<mailto:listmail@joeware.net>] Sent: Thursday, May 01, 2008 6:20 AM To: ActiveDir@mail.activedir.org<mailto:ActiveDir@mail.activedir.org> Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] [OT] introduction You know we didn't run Windows DNS at all. We needed functionality that MSFT didn't put in because they thought they knew what we were doing... -- O'Reilly Active Directory Third Edition - http://www.joeware.net/win/ad3e.htm -----Original Message----- From: ActiveDir-owner@mail.activedir.org<mailto:ActiveDir-owner@mail.activedir.org> [mailto:ActiveDir-owner@mail.activedir.org<mailto:ActiveDir-owner@mail.activedir.org>] On Behalf Of Akomolafe, Deji Sent: Thursday, May 01, 2008 1:17 AM To: ActiveDir@mail.activedir.org<mailto:ActiveDir@mail.activedir.org> Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] [OT] introduction Did I just hear you say "DNS worked very well for us on NT4 (and beyond). Possibly it was simply the quality of the admins running it"? Does that mean you are going to stop dumping on DNS now? Sincerely, _____ (, / \| /) /) /) /---\| (/_ ______ ___// _ // _ ) / \|_/(__(_) // (_(_)(/_(_(_/(__(/_ (_/ /) (/ Microsoft MVP - Directory Services www.akomolafe.name<http://www.akomolafe.name/> - we know IT -5.75, -3.23 Do you now realize that Today is the Tomorrow you were worried about Yesterday? -anon ________________________________________ From: ActiveDir-owner@mail.activedir.org<mailto:ActiveDir-owner@mail.activedir.org> [ActiveDir-owner@mail.activedir.org<mailto:ActiveDir-owner@mail.activedir.org>] On Behalf Of joe [listmail@joeware.net<mailto:listmail@joeware.net>] Sent: Wednesday, April 30, 2008 10:09 PM To: ActiveDir@mail.activedir.org<mailto:ActiveDir@mail.activedir.org> Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] [OT] introduction Maybe because you are recalling this poorly Deji. I wasn't always chasing errant 1C/1B records, I wasn't ever chasing errant 1B/1C records but then you weren't involved in the Enterprise domain stuff where we worked, you worked on resource dp,aom servers. We occasionally has Samba boxes hijacking 1C records and I had a script that monitored that so when it happened we had it fixed in very short order. Outside of that the biggest issue was "admins" miscofiguring servers to either not point at the proper WINS servers or loading and running the WINS Service on them. Got to the point where when someone would call with a WINS issue my team would first check the member server in question to make sure it was configured properly and it usually wasn't. Didn't matter how many times we tried to explain you couldn't configure WINS on a server than then point it at another WINS server for name res and have it work properly. WINS worked very well for us on NT4. Possibly it was simply the quality of the admins running it. -- O'Reilly Active Directory Third Edition - http://www.joeware.net/win/ad3e.htm -----Original Message----- From: ActiveDir-owner@mail.activedir.org<mailto:ActiveDir-owner@mail.activedir.org> [mailto:ActiveDir-owner@mail.activedir.org<mailto:ActiveDir-owner@mail.activedir.org>] On Behalf Of Akomolafe, Deji Sent: Thursday, May 01, 2008 12:29 AM To: ActiveDir@mail.activedir.org<mailto:ActiveDir@mail.activedir.org> Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] [OT] introduction Even in NT 4.0. joe just wouldn't admit that it was a kludge, even for someone with his expertise. He was always chasing after some errant 1C and 1B (or is it 3x) records that periodically go missing for no reason. Sincerely, _____ (, / \| /) /) /) /---\| (/_ ______ ___// _ // _ ) / \|_/(__(_) // (_(_)(/_(_(_/(__(/_ (_/ /) (/ Microsoft MVP - Directory Services www.akomolafe.name<http://www.akomolafe.name/> - we know IT -5.75, -3.23 Do you now realize that Today is the Tomorrow you were worried about Yesterday? -anon ________________________________________ From: ActiveDir-owner@mail.activedir.org<mailto:ActiveDir-owner@mail.activedir.org> [ActiveDir-owner@mail.activedir.org<mailto:ActiveDir-owner@mail.activedir.org>] On Behalf Of Darren Mar-Elia [darren@sdmsoftware.com<mailto:darren@sdmsoftware.com>] Sent: Wednesday, April 30, 2008 9:23 PM To: ActiveDir@mail.activedir.org<mailto:ActiveDir@mail.activedir.org> Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] [OT] introduction Brandon- Apparently you never used WINS in NT 3.50... :-) Darren Mar-Elia CTO & Founder SDM Software, Inc. "The Group Policy Experts" www.sdmsoftware.com<http://www.sdmsoftware.com/> -----Original Message----- From: "Brandon Shell" <tshell@gmail.com<mailto:tshell@gmail.com>> To: ActiveDir@mail.activedir.org<mailto:ActiveDir@mail.activedir.org> Sent: 4/30/2008 6:53 PM Subject: Re: [ActiveDir] [OT] introduction The suffering point was that DNS is harder to configure, Manage, and troubleshoot than WINS. But I agree... lets move on On Wed, Apr 30, 2008 at 9:43 PM, Akomolafe, Deji <deji@readymaids.com<mailto:deji@readymaids.com>> wrote: > You've completely lost me, and I still don't understand the "suffering" > part of your original statement. And you still haven't explained how MS' > decision to adopt Kerberos was the beginning of your woes, especially since > you just stated that other Kerberos implementations depend on DNS as wellList info : http://www.activedir.org/List.aspx List FAQ : http://www.activedir.org/ListFAQ.aspx List archive: http://www.activedir.org/ma/default.aspx List info : http://www.activedir.org/List.aspx List FAQ : http://www.activedir.org/ListFAQ.aspx List archive: http://www.activedir.org/ma/default.aspx List info : http://www.activedir.org/List.aspx List FAQ : http://www.activedir.org/ListFAQ.aspx List archive: http://www.activedir.org/ma/default.aspx List info : http://www.activedir.org/List.aspx List FAQ : http://www.activedir.org/ListFAQ.aspx List archive: http://www.activedir.org/ma/default.aspx List info : http://www.activedir.org/List.aspx List FAQ : http://www.activedir.org/ListFAQ.aspx List archive: http://www.activedir.org/ma/default.aspx List info : http://www.activedir.org/List.aspx List FAQ : http://www.activedir.org/ListFAQ.aspx List archive: http://www.activedir.org/ma/default.aspx List info : http://www.activedir.org/List.aspx List FAQ : http://www.activedir.org/ListFAQ.aspx List archive: http://www.activedir.org/ma/default.aspx

listmail

Posts:428

05/01/2008 11:16 AM
No, it is not logical to assume. -- O'Reilly Active Directory Third Edition - http://www.joeware.net/win/ad3e.htm -----Original Message----- From: ActiveDir-owner@mail.activedir.org [mailto:ActiveDir-owner@mail.activedir.org] On Behalf Of Akomolafe, Deji Sent: Thursday, May 01, 2008 10:22 AM To: ActiveDir@mail.activedir.org Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] [OT] introduction You cleverly side-stepped the question, joe. If you truly believe that the health of a WINS implementation is directly proportional to the "quality" of its implementor/administrator, then is it not logical to assume the same of DNS? Sincerely, _____ (, / \| /) /) /) /---\| (/_ ______ ___// _ // _ ) / \|_/(__(_) // (_(_)(/_(_(_/(__(/_ (_/ /) (/ Microsoft MVP - Directory Services www.akomolafe.name - we know IT -5.75, -3.23 Do you now realize that Today is the Tomorrow you were worried about Yesterday? -anon ________________________________________ From: ActiveDir-owner@mail.activedir.org [ActiveDir-owner@mail.activedir.org] On Behalf Of joe [listmail@joeware.net] Sent: Thursday, May 01, 2008 6:20 AM To: ActiveDir@mail.activedir.org Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] [OT] introduction You know we didn't run Windows DNS at all. We needed functionality that MSFT didn't put in because they thought they knew what we were doing... -- O'Reilly Active Directory Third Edition - http://www.joeware.net/win/ad3e.htm -----Original Message----- From: ActiveDir-owner@mail.activedir.org [mailto:ActiveDir-owner@mail.activedir.org] On Behalf Of Akomolafe, Deji Sent: Thursday, May 01, 2008 1:17 AM To: ActiveDir@mail.activedir.org Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] [OT] introduction Did I just hear you say "DNS worked very well for us on NT4 (and beyond). Possibly it was simply the quality of the admins running it"? Does that mean you are going to stop dumping on DNS now? Sincerely, _____ (, / \| /) /) /) /---\| (/_ ______ ___// _ // _ ) / \|_/(__(_) // (_(_)(/_(_(_/(__(/_ (_/ /) (/ Microsoft MVP - Directory Services www.akomolafe.name - we know IT -5.75, -3.23 Do you now realize that Today is the Tomorrow you were worried about Yesterday? -anon ________________________________________ From: ActiveDir-owner@mail.activedir.org [ActiveDir-owner@mail.activedir.org] On Behalf Of joe [listmail@joeware.net] Sent: Wednesday, April 30, 2008 10:09 PM To: ActiveDir@mail.activedir.org Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] [OT] introduction Maybe because you are recalling this poorly Deji. I wasn't always chasing errant 1C/1B records, I wasn't ever chasing errant 1B/1C records but then you weren't involved in the Enterprise domain stuff where we worked, you worked on resource dp,aom servers. We occasionally has Samba boxes hijacking 1C records and I had a script that monitored that so when it happened we had it fixed in very short order. Outside of that the biggest issue was "admins" miscofiguring servers to either not point at the proper WINS servers or loading and running the WINS Service on them. Got to the point where when someone would call with a WINS issue my team would first check the member server in question to make sure it was configured properly and it usually wasn't. Didn't matter how many times we tried to explain you couldn't configure WINS on a server than then point it at another WINS server for name res and have it work properly. WINS worked very well for us on NT4. Possibly it was simply the quality of the admins running it. -- O'Reilly Active Directory Third Edition - http://www.joeware.net/win/ad3e.htm -----Original Message----- From: ActiveDir-owner@mail.activedir.org [mailto:ActiveDir-owner@mail.activedir.org] On Behalf Of Akomolafe, Deji Sent: Thursday, May 01, 2008 12:29 AM To: ActiveDir@mail.activedir.org Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] [OT] introduction Even in NT 4.0. joe just wouldn't admit that it was a kludge, even for someone with his expertise. He was always chasing after some errant 1C and 1B (or is it 3x) records that periodically go missing for no reason. Sincerely, _____ (, / \| /) /) /) /---\| (/_ ______ ___// _ // _ ) / \|_/(__(_) // (_(_)(/_(_(_/(__(/_ (_/ /) (/ Microsoft MVP - Directory Services www.akomolafe.name - we know IT -5.75, -3.23 Do you now realize that Today is the Tomorrow you were worried about Yesterday? -anon ________________________________________ From: ActiveDir-owner@mail.activedir.org [ActiveDir-owner@mail.activedir.org] On Behalf Of Darren Mar-Elia [darren@sdmsoftware.com] Sent: Wednesday, April 30, 2008 9:23 PM To: ActiveDir@mail.activedir.org Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] [OT] introduction Brandon- Apparently you never used WINS in NT 3.50... :-) Darren Mar-Elia CTO & Founder SDM Software, Inc. "The Group Policy Experts" www.sdmsoftware.com -----Original Message----- From: "Brandon Shell" <tshell@gmail.com> To: ActiveDir@mail.activedir.org Sent: 4/30/2008 6:53 PM Subject: Re: [ActiveDir] [OT] introduction The suffering point was that DNS is harder to configure, Manage, and troubleshoot than WINS. But I agree... lets move on On Wed, Apr 30, 2008 at 9:43 PM, Akomolafe, Deji <deji@readymaids.com> wrote: > You've completely lost me, and I still don't understand the "suffering" > part of your original statement. And you still haven't explained how MS' > decision to adopt Kerberos was the beginning of your woes, especially since > you just stated that other Kerberos implementations depend on DNS as wellList info : http://www.activedir.org/List.aspx List FAQ : http://www.activedir.org/ListFAQ.aspx List archive: http://www.activedir.org/ma/default.aspx List info : http://www.activedir.org/List.aspx List FAQ : http://www.activedir.org/ListFAQ.aspx List archive: http://www.activedir.org/ma/default.aspx List info : http://www.activedir.org/List.aspx List FAQ : http://www.activedir.org/ListFAQ.aspx List archive: http://www.activedir.org/ma/default.aspx List info : http://www.activedir.org/List.aspx List FAQ : http://www.activedir.org/ListFAQ.aspx List archive: http://www.activedir.org/ma/default.aspx List info : http://www.activedir.org/List.aspx List FAQ : http://www.activedir.org/ListFAQ.aspx List archive: http://www.activedir.org/ma/default.aspx List info : http://www.activedir.org/List.aspx List FAQ : http://www.activedir.org/ListFAQ.aspx List archive: http://www.activedir.org/ma/default.aspx List info : http://www.activedir.org/List.aspx List FAQ : http://www.activedir.org/ListFAQ.aspx List archive: http://www.activedir.org/ma/default.aspx

jw1

Posts:0

05/01/2008 11:56 AM
That might be the case - but I think the point is that WINS is less complex to manage. So it'll take fewer admins/lower TCO/fewer operational risks vs. DNS, given the same quality admins. --James -----Original Message----- From: ActiveDir-owner@mail.activedir.org [mailto:ActiveDir-owner@mail.activedir.org] On Behalf Of Akomolafe, Deji Sent: Thursday, May 01, 2008 9:22 AM To: ActiveDir@mail.activedir.org Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] [OT] introduction You cleverly side-stepped the question, joe. If you truly believe that the health of a WINS implementation is directly proportional to the "quality" of its implementor/administrator, then is it not logical to assume the same of DNS? Sincerely, _____ (, / \| /) /) /) /---\| (/_ ______ ___// _ // _ ) / \|_/(__(_) // (_(_)(/_(_(_/(__(/_ (_/ /) (/ Microsoft MVP - Directory Services www.akomolafe.name - we know IT -5.75, -3.23 Do you now realize that Today is the Tomorrow you were worried about Yesterday? -anon ________________________________________ From: ActiveDir-owner@mail.activedir.org [ActiveDir-owner@mail.activedir.org] On Behalf Of joe [listmail@joeware.net] Sent: Thursday, May 01, 2008 6:20 AM To: ActiveDir@mail.activedir.org Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] [OT] introduction You know we didn't run Windows DNS at all. We needed functionality that MSFT didn't put in because they thought they knew what we were doing... -- O'Reilly Active Directory Third Edition - http://www.joeware.net/win/ad3e.htm -----Original Message----- From: ActiveDir-owner@mail.activedir.org [mailto:ActiveDir-owner@mail.activedir.org] On Behalf Of Akomolafe, Deji Sent: Thursday, May 01, 2008 1:17 AM To: ActiveDir@mail.activedir.org Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] [OT] introduction Did I just hear you say "DNS worked very well for us on NT4 (and beyond). Possibly it was simply the quality of the admins running it"? Does that mean you are going to stop dumping on DNS now? Sincerely, _____ (, / \| /) /) /) /---\| (/_ ______ ___// _ // _ ) / \|_/(__(_) // (_(_)(/_(_(_/(__(/_ (_/ /) (/ Microsoft MVP - Directory Services www.akomolafe.name - we know IT -5.75, -3.23 Do you now realize that Today is the Tomorrow you were worried about Yesterday? -anon ________________________________________ From: ActiveDir-owner@mail.activedir.org [ActiveDir-owner@mail.activedir.org] On Behalf Of joe [listmail@joeware.net] Sent: Wednesday, April 30, 2008 10:09 PM To: ActiveDir@mail.activedir.org Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] [OT] introduction Maybe because you are recalling this poorly Deji. I wasn't always chasing errant 1C/1B records, I wasn't ever chasing errant 1B/1C records but then you weren't involved in the Enterprise domain stuff where we worked, you worked on resource dp,aom servers. We occasionally has Samba boxes hijacking 1C records and I had a script that monitored that so when it happened we had it fixed in very short order. Outside of that the biggest issue was "admins" miscofiguring servers to either not point at the proper WINS servers or loading and running the WINS Service on them. Got to the point where when someone would call with a WINS issue my team would first check the member server in question to make sure it was configured properly and it usually wasn't. Didn't matter how many times we tried to explain you couldn't configure WINS on a server than then point it at another WINS server for name res and have it work properly. WINS worked very well for us on NT4. Possibly it was simply the quality of the admins running it. -- O'Reilly Active Directory Third Edition - http://www.joeware.net/win/ad3e.htm -----Original Message----- From: ActiveDir-owner@mail.activedir.org [mailto:ActiveDir-owner@mail.activedir.org] On Behalf Of Akomolafe, Deji Sent: Thursday, May 01, 2008 12:29 AM To: ActiveDir@mail.activedir.org Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] [OT] introduction Even in NT 4.0. joe just wouldn't admit that it was a kludge, even for someone with his expertise. He was always chasing after some errant 1C and 1B (or is it 3x) records that periodically go missing for no reason. Sincerely, _____ (, / \| /) /) /) /---\| (/_ ______ ___// _ // _ ) / \|_/(__(_) // (_(_)(/_(_(_/(__(/_ (_/ /) (/ Microsoft MVP - Directory Services www.akomolafe.name - we know IT -5.75, -3.23 Do you now realize that Today is the Tomorrow you were worried about Yesterday? -anon ________________________________________ From: ActiveDir-owner@mail.activedir.org [ActiveDir-owner@mail.activedir.org] On Behalf Of Darren Mar-Elia [darren@sdmsoftware.com] Sent: Wednesday, April 30, 2008 9:23 PM To: ActiveDir@mail.activedir.org Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] [OT] introduction Brandon- Apparently you never used WINS in NT 3.50... :-) Darren Mar-Elia CTO & Founder SDM Software, Inc. "The Group Policy Experts" www.sdmsoftware.com -----Original Message----- From: "Brandon Shell" <tshell@gmail.com> To: ActiveDir@mail.activedir.org Sent: 4/30/2008 6:53 PM Subject: Re: [ActiveDir] [OT] introduction The suffering point was that DNS is harder to configure, Manage, and troubleshoot than WINS. But I agree... lets move on On Wed, Apr 30, 2008 at 9:43 PM, Akomolafe, Deji <deji@readymaids.com> wrote: > You've completely lost me, and I still don't understand the "suffering" > part of your original statement. And you still haven't explained how MS' > decision to adopt Kerberos was the beginning of your woes, especially since > you just stated that other Kerberos implementations depend on DNS as wellList info : http://www.activedir.org/List.aspx List FAQ : http://www.activedir.org/ListFAQ.aspx List archive: http://www.activedir.org/ma/default.aspx List info : http://www.activedir.org/List.aspx List FAQ : http://www.activedir.org/ListFAQ.aspx List archive: http://www.activedir.org/ma/default.aspx List info : http://www.activedir.org/List.aspx List FAQ : http://www.activedir.org/ListFAQ.aspx List archive: http://www.activedir.org/ma/default.aspx List info : http://www.activedir.org/List.aspx List FAQ : http://www.activedir.org/ListFAQ.aspx List archive: http://www.activedir.org/ma/default.aspx List info : http://www.activedir.org/List.aspx List FAQ : http://www.activedir.org/ListFAQ.aspx List archive: http://www.activedir.org/ma/default.aspx List info : http://www.activedir.org/List.aspx List FAQ : http://www.activedir.org/ListFAQ.aspx List archive: http://www.activedir.org/ma/default.aspx List info : http://www.activedir.org/List.aspx List FAQ : http://www.activedir.org/ListFAQ.aspx List archive: http://www.activedir.org/ma/default.aspx

neilruston User is Offline

Posts:144

05/01/2008 12:32 PM
I've done many a TCO study and in my experience [if I was to compare WINS and DNS], the TCO for WINS would be HIGHER. My 2 penneth, neil -----Original Message----- From: ActiveDir-owner@mail.activedir.org [mailto:ActiveDir-owner@mail.activedir.org] On Behalf Of Wells, James Arthur Sent: 01 May 2008 16:51 To: ActiveDir@mail.activedir.org Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] [OT] introduction That might be the case - but I think the point is that WINS is less complex to manage. So it'll take fewer admins/lower TCO/fewer operational risks vs. DNS, given the same quality admins. --James -----Original Message----- From: ActiveDir-owner@mail.activedir.org [mailto:ActiveDir-owner@mail.activedir.org] On Behalf Of Akomolafe, Deji Sent: Thursday, May 01, 2008 9:22 AM To: ActiveDir@mail.activedir.org Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] [OT] introduction You cleverly side-stepped the question, joe. If you truly believe that the health of a WINS implementation is directly proportional to the "quality" of its implementor/administrator, then is it not logical to assume the same of DNS? Sincerely, _____ (, / \| /) /) /) /---\| (/_ ______ ___// _ // _ ) / \|_/(__(_) // (_(_)(/_(_(_/(__(/_ (_/ /) (/ Microsoft MVP - Directory Services www.akomolafe.name - we know IT -5.75, -3.23 Do you now realize that Today is the Tomorrow you were worried about Yesterday? -anon ________________________________________ From: ActiveDir-owner@mail.activedir.org [ActiveDir-owner@mail.activedir.org] On Behalf Of joe [listmail@joeware.net] Sent: Thursday, May 01, 2008 6:20 AM To: ActiveDir@mail.activedir.org Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] [OT] introduction You know we didn't run Windows DNS at all. We needed functionality that MSFT didn't put in because they thought they knew what we were doing... -- O'Reilly Active Directory Third Edition - http://www.joeware.net/win/ad3e.htm -----Original Message----- From: ActiveDir-owner@mail.activedir.org [mailto:ActiveDir-owner@mail.activedir.org] On Behalf Of Akomolafe, Deji Sent: Thursday, May 01, 2008 1:17 AM To: ActiveDir@mail.activedir.org Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] [OT] introduction Did I just hear you say "DNS worked very well for us on NT4 (and beyond). Possibly it was simply the quality of the admins running it"? Does that mean you are going to stop dumping on DNS now? Sincerely, _____ (, / \| /) /) /) /---\| (/_ ______ ___// _ // _ ) / \|_/(__(_) // (_(_)(/_(_(_/(__(/_ (_/ /) (/ Microsoft MVP - Directory Services www.akomolafe.name - we know IT -5.75, -3.23 Do you now realize that Today is the Tomorrow you were worried about Yesterday? -anon ________________________________________ From: ActiveDir-owner@mail.activedir.org [ActiveDir-owner@mail.activedir.org] On Behalf Of joe [listmail@joeware.net] Sent: Wednesday, April 30, 2008 10:09 PM To: ActiveDir@mail.activedir.org Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] [OT] introduction Maybe because you are recalling this poorly Deji. I wasn't always chasing errant 1C/1B records, I wasn't ever chasing errant 1B/1C records but then you weren't involved in the Enterprise domain stuff where we worked, you worked on resource dp,aom servers. We occasionally has Samba boxes hijacking 1C records and I had a script that monitored that so when it happened we had it fixed in very short order. Outside of that the biggest issue was "admins" miscofiguring servers to either not point at the proper WINS servers or loading and running the WINS Service on them. Got to the point where when someone would call with a WINS issue my team would first check the member server in question to make sure it was configured properly and it usually wasn't. Didn't matter how many times we tried to explain you couldn't configure WINS on a server than then point it at another WINS server for name res and have it work properly. WINS worked very well for us on NT4. Possibly it was simply the quality of the admins running it. -- O'Reilly Active Directory Third Edition - http://www.joeware.net/win/ad3e.htm -----Original Message----- From: ActiveDir-owner@mail.activedir.org [mailto:ActiveDir-owner@mail.activedir.org] On Behalf Of Akomolafe, Deji Sent: Thursday, May 01, 2008 12:29 AM To: ActiveDir@mail.activedir.org Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] [OT] introduction Even in NT 4.0. joe just wouldn't admit that it was a kludge, even for someone with his expertise. He was always chasing after some errant 1C and 1B (or is it 3x) records that periodically go missing for no reason. Sincerely, _____ (, / \| /) /) /) /---\| (/_ ______ ___// _ // _ ) / \|_/(__(_) // (_(_)(/_(_(_/(__(/_ (_/ /) (/ Microsoft MVP - Directory Services www.akomolafe.name - we know IT -5.75, -3.23 Do you now realize that Today is the Tomorrow you were worried about Yesterday? -anon ________________________________________ From: ActiveDir-owner@mail.activedir.org [ActiveDir-owner@mail.activedir.org] On Behalf Of Darren Mar-Elia [darren@sdmsoftware.com] Sent: Wednesday, April 30, 2008 9:23 PM To: ActiveDir@mail.activedir.org Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] [OT] introduction Brandon- Apparently you never used WINS in NT 3.50... :-) Darren Mar-Elia CTO & Founder SDM Software, Inc. "The Group Policy Experts" www.sdmsoftware.com -----Original Message----- From: "Brandon Shell" <tshell@gmail.com> To: ActiveDir@mail.activedir.org Sent: 4/30/2008 6:53 PM Subject: Re: [ActiveDir] [OT] introduction The suffering point was that DNS is harder to configure, Manage, and troubleshoot than WINS. But I agree... lets move on On Wed, Apr 30, 2008 at 9:43 PM, Akomolafe, Deji <deji@readymaids.com> wrote: > You've completely lost me, and I still don't understand the "suffering" > part of your original statement. And you still haven't explained how MS' > decision to adopt Kerberos was the beginning of your woes, especially since > you just stated that other Kerberos implementations depend on DNS as wellList info : http://www.activedir.org/List.aspx List FAQ : http://www.activedir.org/ListFAQ.aspx List archive: http://www.activedir.org/ma/default.aspx List info : http://www.activedir.org/List.aspx List FAQ : http://www.activedir.org/ListFAQ.aspx List archive: http://www.activedir.org/ma/default.aspx List info : http://www.activedir.org/List.aspx List FAQ : http://www.activedir.org/ListFAQ.aspx List archive: http://www.activedir.org/ma/default.aspx List info : http://www.activedir.org/List.aspx List FAQ : http://www.activedir.org/ListFAQ.aspx List archive: http://www.activedir.org/ma/default.aspx List info : http://www.activedir.org/List.aspx List FAQ : http://www.activedir.org/ListFAQ.aspx List archive: http://www.activedir.org/ma/default.aspx List info : http://www.activedir.org/List.aspx List FAQ : http://www.activedir.org/ListFAQ.aspx List archive: http://www.activedir.org/ma/default.aspx List info : http://www.activedir.org/List.aspx List FAQ : http://www.activedir.org/ListFAQ.aspx List archive: http://www.activedir.org/ma/default.aspx Barclays Wealth is the wealth management division of Barclays Bank PLC. This email may relate to or be sent from other members of the Barclays Group. The availability of products and services may be limited by the applicable laws and regulations in certain jurisdictions. The Barclays Group does not normally accept or offer business instructions via internet email. Any action that you might take upon this message might be at your own risk. This email and any attachments are confidential and intended solely for the addressee and may also be privileged or exempt from disclosure under applicable law. If you are not the addressee, or have received this email in error, please notify the sender immediately, delete it from your system and do not copy, disclose or otherwise act upon any part of this email or its attachments. Internet communications are not guaranteed to be secure or virus-free. The Barclays Group does not accept responsibility for any loss arising from unauthorised access to, or interference with, any Internet communications by any third party, or from the transmission of any viruses. Replies to this email may be monitored by the Barclays Group for operational or business reasons. Any opinion or other information in this email or its attachments that does not relate to the business of the Barclays Group is personal to the sender and is not given or endorsed by the Barclays Group. Barclays Bank PLC. Registered in England and Wales (registered no. 1026167). Registered Office: 1 Churchill Place, London, E14 5HP, United Kingdom. Barclays Bank PLC is authorised and regulated by the Financial Services Authority. List info : http://www.activedir.org/List.aspx List FAQ : http://www.activedir.org/ListFAQ.aspx List archive: http://www.activedir.org/ma/default.aspx

amulnick

Posts:127

05/01/2008 2:02 PM
Hang on. The TLA for Powershell is PoSΏ] Ώ] I never even considered it might be posh. But pos has possibilities to say the least. On Thu, May 1, 2008 at 9:36 AM, joe <listmail@joeware.net> wrote: > "I have to admit... I didnt do much in NT 3.5" > > It didn't have PoSΏ] so he didn't know how to do anything... Or maybe he > was moping... > > ;o) > > joe > > > P.S. Not sure if Brandon owned up to it on the list yet, but I will "out" > him and say he is a PoS MVP... Here is his blog - > http://bsonposh.com/modules/wordpress/ It is actually fairly interesting > stuff if you are working with PowerShell. However, don't expect the "About" > page to be updated from "This is an example of a Wordpress page..." until > WordPress comes out with a PoS provider... So, in other words... not anytime > soon. > > > Ώ] This would be PowerShell. PS won't work, that has other more important > meaning and well PoSh... this is PoSh -> > http://www.jossip.com/gossip/Victoria%20Beckham%20--%20super%20skinny%20-%20lg%20rec.jpg and > that is just way better than any command line thing. > > > > -- > O'Reilly Active Directory Third Edition - > http://www.joeware.net/win/ad3e.htm > > > > ------------------------------ > From: ActiveDir-owner@mail.activedir.org [mailto: > ActiveDir-owner@mail.activedir.org] On Behalf Of Brandon Shell > Sent: Thursday, May 01, 2008 7:22 AM > To: ActiveDir@mail.activedir.org > Subject: Re: [ActiveDir] [OT] introduction > > I have to admit... I didnt do much in NT 3.5, but on the flip side DNS > wasnt so hot back then either > > On Thu, May 1, 2008 at 12:23 AM, Darren Mar-Elia <darren@sdmsoftware.com> > wrote: > > > Brandon- > > > > Apparently you never used WINS in NT 3.50... :-) > > > > Darren Mar-Elia > > CTO & Founder > > SDM Software, Inc. > > "The Group Policy Experts" > > www.sdmsoftware.com > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: "Brandon Shell" <tshell@gmail.com> > > To: ActiveDir@mail.activedir.org > > Sent: 4/30/2008 6:53 PM > > Subject: Re: [ActiveDir] [OT] introduction > > > > The suffering point was that DNS is harder to configure, Manage, and > > troubleshoot than WINS. > > > > But I agree... lets move on > > > > On Wed, Apr 30, 2008 at 9:43 PM, Akomolafe, Deji <deji@readymaids.com> > > wrote: > > > > > You've completely lost me, and I still don't understand the > > "suffering" > > > part of your original statement. And you still haven't explained how > > MS' > > > decision to adopt Kerberos was the beginning of your woes, especially > > since > > > you just stated that other Kerberos implementations depend on DNS as > > wellList info : http://www.activedir.org/List.aspx > > List FAQ : http://www.activedir.org/ListFAQ.aspx > > List archive: http://www.activedir.org/ma/default.aspx > > > >

You are not authorized to post a reply.

Page 2 of 2

Forums >ActiveDir Mail List Archive >List Archives > [ActiveDir] [OT] introduction

ActiveForums 3.7

Syndicate

Friends

List Archives

List Archives

Friends