[PLUG] NetWare & Linux?

[Steven A. Adams]

On Tue, 2003-04-15 at 17:06, Michael Robinson wrote:
> On Tuesday 15 April 2003 04:28 pm, you wrote:
> > On Tue, 15 Apr 2003, Schlosser, Ryan wrote:
> > > Specific Netware feature(s) I'd like to see replicated elsewhere:
> >
> > [snip lots of good comments]
> >
> > 3) Netware's security record. From what I can tell, there just aren't
> >    that many known vulnerabilities. It may be security through 'who
> >    cares?' -- but my hunch is that there's more to it than that.
> >
> > --Paul Heinlein <heinlein at attbi.com>
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > PLUG mailing list
> > PLUG at lists.pdxlinux.org
> > http://lists.pdxlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug
> 
> I have heard from many sources that Netware's security
> record is impressive.  Yet I know someone who works for U.S.
> Fish & Wildlife that says that Netware was dumped for NT
> because of number of users or Netware didn't integrate well
> with Windows or something.  I tried to take a Novell course
> at PCC but 98 and Novell just don't get along and the materials
> for the course were contradictory where one chapter would
> say one thing while another chapter would say the exact
> opposite.  The course seemed to be more geared toward a
> political than a practical approach, a waste of money.
> Instead of focusing on a specific way to answer questions
> I really wish the course would have focused on understanding
> the Novell Netware 4.7 environment more.  At the time the
> concern was about Netware 5 and I think the quality of
> education slipped.

Was Netware 4.7 a typo? I've been through 4 revisions of that OS and can
tell you that I have not had that experience (but then, I never took an
instructor led course, it was all hands on and challenge).

>  
> 
> Ironically, Netware 5 is touted because it use the ip
> protocol where I thought the point of using Netware
> was to get away from the ip protocol with all it's
> inherent security protocols.  Look at the complex of
> a good netfilter firewall when your lan uses ip and
> it's no surprise there's good reason to use a 
> different protocol for your lan.  Just think, all the
> RFC's, 1517,1518,1519.1520, which talk about
> renumbering lans because of routing issues 
> could be ignored.  With Netware only one
> box needed to be special to be able to go out
> on the ip networks.
> 

Too true, they should have stayed there too.

> There has been some question as
> to whether or not Linux users need Novell integration
> and I for one have wondered why Novell didn't open source
> NDS.  At least if Novell licensing was cheap enough I bet
> it'd go a lot further than NT.  Netware, NT, and exchange etc.
> have been around long enough that I would hope to see
> an open source standard for providing the same services
> develop.  Just the valuable services that are worth keeping
> thinking specifically of exchange server, whatever that is.
> On the other hand maybe integrated software isn't the way
> to go.  There's something to be said for simple programs
> that are well defined and perform their tasks correctly.
> 

Actually, NDS is based on the x.500 spec, as is LDAP, so in a sense it
is available - just undeveloped in this world, but it's gaining ground.

>      -- Michael C. Robinson
> 
> _______________________________________________
> PLUG mailing list
> PLUG at lists.pdxlinux.org
> http://lists.pdxlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug
-- 
Steven A. Adams <stevea at nwtechops.com>