[Date Prev][Date Next]
I'm replying to an off list message on list since I think this summarizes
a number of the issues I've brought up and ends on a more positive note.
On Mon, 20 Sep 2004, Digant Kasundra wrote:
I think you are off base here.
I think you're mistaken.
OpenLDAP uses standard LDAP and any product that claims to support LDAP
should be able to talk to OpenLDAP just as it would any other LDAP
directory. However, the specifics as to how information needs to be
structured depends on the application itself and is therefore best
discussed on lists setup specifically for that application.
But there are no lists for Outlook admins. A web forum is not a list.
And if Microsoft is sponsoring it neither a web forum nor a mailing list
will do you much good. How would YOU feel if somebody said "hay, go get
help from Microsoft"? Does that not even sound a little like "screw off"
to you? Honestly?
It is also off base to expect OpenLDAP to spend time and money
supporting other vendor for-profit applications.
That's not what I'm expecting. I'm expecting openldap to let openldap
users help each other without kicking them to the curb.
The problem and frustration you are experiencing is because Microsoft
products do not interoperate well with non-MS products, and when they
do, MS does not document it well, and if you ask questions, MS will not
answer you. Your problem is with Microsoft.
Admittedly. Generally speaking when I've had problems with interopating
with Microsoft the only place there was any hope of getting help was the
relevant mailing list. Take samba for instance. Samba mailing list
members don't seem to have any qualms about discussing interoperability.
I'm sorry by your frustration. I'm sorry if your inability to make a
for-profit Microsoft product work has turned you off to open source.
I'm hardly turned off to open source. I'm writing this email in pine on a
Fedora Core 2 box. I'm going to use other open source tools like tcpdump
and ethereal to sniff the LDAP packets between Outlook and OpenLDAP and
post the solution. If ethereal doesn't show enough of what's going on in
the LDAP packets I'll use Perl's LDAP implementation to talk to AD. No
amount of fascism will turn me off to open source. It only makes me
fonder of it. Freedom is good. Fascism is bad. Repeat. Rinse.
Considering the people that might be turned off by Kurt's attitude is a
conversation that might be worth having.
Perhaps you might want to look at using an actual open source product
and ask people on that list now to properly setup your directory
information tree to make it work. In other words, the way open source
would work would be to discuss problems setting up OpenLDAP here, and
problem setting up an email client (Evolution or Mozilla, perhaps) on
those mailing lists.
We haven't had any trouble getting mozilla or pine to talk to openldap.
Getting the open source pieces of this working was amazingly straight
forward IMHO. I'm quite pleased with what I've gotten done in the last
week in regard to LDAP. I wish I had been using using it years ago.
My next task will be to get sendmail to share virtusertable entries and
local-host-names across a few boxes. If I can spread my mail load out and
having the front end boxes send the mail directly to its destination I
will be in redundancy nerdvana. Here I go.
There are two ways of constructing a software design. One way is to make
it so simple that there are obviously no deficiencies. And the other way
is to make it so complicated that there are no obvious deficiencies.
-- C.A.R. Hoare