Re: Solaris: The Most Advanced OS?
%% Michel Loos <loos@qt1.iq.usp.br> writes:
ml> Is NIS reliable?
Sure. Enterprises have been deploying it in huge environments for 10-15
years or more.
ml> It seems to me that NIS is being obsoleted, since using a secure
ml> LDAP is much more secure. How stands Solaris when using a PAM/LDAP
ml> solution.
You didn't say "secure", you said "reliable". Also, there are plenty
more databases distributed with NIS than just passwords: mail aliases,
netgroups, automount maps, etc. etc.
ml> Is NFS pre v4 reliable?
ml> I don't think so, it has a large number of security holes.
Again, you're conflating two different things: security and reliability.
In fact, NFSv3 is pretty reliable (given annoying issues like cto
caching etc.) and is being used all over the place.
Security is an entirely different issue and can be addressed on other
levels, at least to a degree.
ml> So the major advantages of Solaris is better support of obsolete
ml> systems, which are only being used because Solaris does not
ml> support the better, modern solutions? Seems a little circular to
ml> me.
Regardless, the fact is that companies have sunk hundreds of thousands
of dollars into data storage facilities based entirely around NFS, and
none of the big ones support NFSv4: it's still considered experimental.
Even if they did, the infrastructure necessary to support secure NFSv4
is not present.
I'm saying that if Linux wants to be able to work in enterprise
deployments like these as well as Solaris does, then it has some work to
do because right now it doesn't, in my experience.
Wishing it were different doesn't change the facts on the ground.
--
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Paul D. Smith <psmith@nortel.com> HASMAT--HA Software Mthds & Tools
"Please remain calm...I may be mad, but I am a professional." --Mad Scientist
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
These are my opinions--Nortel takes no responsibility for them.
Reply to: