Netware NDS vs Microsoft AD

We have been a long time Novell shop. For longer than the 8 years I've been here. But we are making the switch from Novell to AD. I agree with your sentiment that if it ain't broke don't fix it. In our case it wasn't broken, but it was becoming increasingly difficult and costly to do what we wanted.

Everytime we wanted to use a new technology it would always be "Novell is not supported", or "It works with MS out of the box, but to get it to work with Novell you also have to buy this".

We also have a distributed network, with about 30 network admins. We ahve been finding it increasingly difficult to secure this diverse network. In our case, switching to AD will give us a more secure network, with better management features, for a lower cost.

We are a local authority in the UK, and have about 200 sites, but managed centrally from one location. We use Novell for most authentication/app delivery (zenworks), file and print etc.

I have recently looked through loads of research to see if there would be any advantage to us switching to MS-based network (we have a significant number of MS application boxes).

My conclusion is that it is very expensive to do, and would not give us much more than we have at present.

The only unbiased studies I found are from the likes of Gartner, who basically say the answer depend on where you're starting from. Many orgs have MS networks already, or have MS Exchange, so the move is not as significant. However, for those staying with Novell, a move to Linux is inevitable I think.

I too would appreciate more feedback in this area...

I managed a Netware network for 10 years and in the past two have had to make the switch to AD with W2k and win2003 servers. The switch was a bit difficult at first and what I have seen is that there are advantages to both systems. I like the ability to more easily tie security to the file level in Netware as opposed to the layers that I have seen in Windows. However, I ran into the same problem that others have seen and that is that developers have not been creating server based products compatible with Netware, in the areas that we needed. The expense of making the switch also appears to be much higher but there are a great many tools and server based applications that simply are not availble for Netware. My ideal network would be NDS at the front end to provide security etc. for AD running behind it. Both have their good points. It depends on what you need. The change, in my opinion should be driven by the need to have to. Otherwise it is too expensive to do so. We had to change here for compatibility reasons with other agencies. I have been surprised at the stability with Win2000 and the ease of installation with Win2003.

I my self am a strong backer of Windows based products, knowing them extensively has put food on the table for the past 8 years.
At my current employer, we run both. We?re actually in long, drawn out process to were the Novell servers are going to end up being just file servers. This is because more and more of our applications require windows servers. (This is also why they hired me)
We have the windows servers set up on their own domain; the clients are only on a workgroup with the Novell client installed.
I find that the Novell is easier to administer rights and access as the AD presents security issues to giving more open access than I like to have so that users can get to what they need too.
We could put the clients on a domain and the then use AD to lock down the right but currently that?s more administration then we want to have, however I see it coming in the near future.
FYI Microsoft does have an ldf import/export app that is suppose to work with transferring users/rights to and from Novell nds, however we have not used it.
It?s built by Microsoft so it might only be friendly to the Windows server.

Hello,

I don't have the articles handy, but Novell's e-directory is faster and more reliable for an Enterprise environment than Active Directory. e-directory, or NDS as it was called, has been around since the mid 1990's, and offers a lot of management options for the Enterprise. NDS can manage disk quotas across the enterprise; AD does it on a server by server basis. NDS, in my opinion, has better tools and greater stability and functionality.

AD is not a deadbeat product, however. AD is tied into MS Exchange for Address book information. AD is a well needed step from the NT4 days of server islands out there without Enterprise management. AD can easily be setup to work with WAN sites and their often slow connections.

Perhaps to help us out, you might wish to tell us a bit more about your company, and what your needs are. What is important to you? Email? Printing? Citrix support? Different name spaces on the file servers?

Also, in order to attract comment to this topic, I am breaking your question into a new thread, so that others may notice it, and generate comments.

And between you and me, I would take the Novell.

Prasanna Umarji

I have worked with both AD and Novell. I am currently using Novell NDS.

We are a community bank with just two branches and a main office. We have 3 Novell servers- one at each location, 2 SQL servers(W2k3), Patchlink Mangement server (W2k3), and a citrix server W2k.

I was green to Novell until I started here almost 4 years ago, but it was easier to me than AD and less complicated. It seems in AD in order to get one thing to work for a certain user, you had to make a couple changes to some policies that may or may not compromise your whole security schema. With NDS I make a security change at the user or group level and that's it.

We are looking at implementing Zenworks for more mangement features this year. I have really liked the Patchlink product that we just installed this last quarter.

It is sometimes a challenge to find the right software that works perfectly in the NDS environment and I have found that not all printers come with capable network cards for Novell. However, the servers themselves are amazing as far as stability and security. It is not unheard of around here to go 100-200 DAYS without having to reboot the server or add another patch- I think that's what I have really grown to love about Novell. Not sure where this Linux stuff is going but 6.5 should be stable enough for us for now.

I vote with Novell over AD for ease of use as my number 1 reason.

Hope this helps

I have used both AD and NDS for many years. There are great features in both. I believe it is very difficult to make a case for one over the other as they are both based off of the X.500 directory structure. I got my start in this field using Novell in the old 2.x days. I have seen NDS mature and grow into a very robust and stable platform. From a pure file and print environment, Novell is hands down a better system. Microsoft gains the edge when it comes to applications, services, and ease of use. I have found AD to be easier to configure than NDS when dealing with multiple sites across an enterprise. If you have an NDS structure in place and it works, I wouldn't replace it just for the sake of change. If support of your applications becomes a major issue, then it may well be worth the cost of the conversion.

Good Luck,
Mike

All of the posts in this discussion present valid points to the strengths of both AD and NDS. What is missing? Everyone says Netware and NDS in the same breath. How untrue. eDirectory (formerly NDS) will run "natively" on many different OS's,...Windows, Netware, Linux, etc. You can have eDirectory without a single Netware server, but why would you? I have multiple years of experience with Netware (from 3.11 to 6.5), AD and more recently Linux(RHE 4)w/LDAP(Samba3) and NO EXCHANGE! Setting up new users is a real chore, but do-able. I miss the ease of a single point of management for everything in the IT realm. Point of fact: eDirectory, out of the box can fully control/maintain AD, the same cannot be said of AD over eDirectory. eDirectory tops out at over a billion objects, AD a few hundred thousand. Novell has been doing user/group security and policy management with objects since the late 80's when NDS came into being...I respect their experience and the ease of use of eDirectory.
I service a group of engineers and designers who frequently come to me wanting to get back a file that has been modified...how I wish for a Netware file server! Netware has had "built in" SALVAGE forever (since 3.11). I can give a user back multiple versions of any file (that was properly saved) since the last back, or even "in between" backups. Users themselves can do that if the optional Netware client is installed. MS servers cannot do that! Linux servers cannot do that...HOW SAD. If backups, and the speed of such are of any concern to you then you want the fastest OS with regard to file structure...that would be Unix/Linux, followed by Netware and a far, far distant third of MS (they use SMB blocks). So if you switch to MS you need to plan for at least double (maybe triple) the time to do your backups. Food for thought. srk

I'm trying to imagine a compelling reason to change from eDir to AD. Cost savings? No. Ease of administration? No. Security? No. What's left? Homogonization? FUD?

I would recommend that eDirectory continue to be your primary directory service. Having AD will give you some group level security policy administration on the workstations that you don't have in an NT4 domain (or, at least, that's my understanding.) Let eDirectory control AD and be the primary tool for securing and providing network resources.

The only other compelling reasons for AD, that I'm aware of, would have to do with WIndows server administration and any application that supports/needs AD for some reason, whether it be authentication or something else. Simply switching just for switching's sake does not seem to be fiscally or intellectually logical.

Just to be clear about what you're asking - are you in fact talking about operating systems (NetWare vs. Windows), or directory services (eDirectory (formerly NDS) vs. AD)? You mention both, but I get the sense the real issue is the OS.

As far as directory services, I'm sure you know that, at least in the case of eDirectory, the directory is a separate matter from the OS. That is, you could run a farm of entirely Windows servers but still use eDirectory as your directory service (or you could run it on linux or unix or IBM mainframes for that matter.) eDirectory can be, and often is, used as a company's directory service (or one in a mix) with no NetWare in sight. Whether that's worth doing really depends on your site. If you're migrating to 100% Microsoft on the server side, then I'd say just go with AD. If you're running a shop with mixed platforms, as many of us do, then there may be good reasons to use eDirectory as your primary directory. (Don't forget about some of the excellent add-ons that eDirectory can enable for you - such as ZENworks.)

If, however, the question is really about OS's, then I would think that's a fairly straightforward matter of evaluating each platform vs. your needs - the "needs" part coming first. "Needs" probably gets pretty directly to the question of the applications you need to run, and whether they are supported on the platform in question. Be aware, though, that when you're talking NetWare, you're really talking linux, because NetWare's future is as a services stack running on SuSE linux. Version 6.5 is the end of the road for standalone NetWare. So you need to figure out if your application needs can be met on Open Enterprise Server (NetWare stack running on Linux), or on native SuSE.

For my part, I've run a NetWare shop for the past 14 years, and have no intention of migrating away from Novell. Our server-based application needs are few (web, email, FTP, a couple of homegrown apps and a database, and a couple of Citrix boxes). Our apps were written in Java and MySQL works just dandy as our database server, so for us a mix of NetWare and SuSE linux - trending eventually to more OES/linux - meets our needs just fine. (We're even considering the Novell desktop as a possible replacement for Windows, client-side.) Novell said recently that NetWare 6.5 would be supported for another 9 years, so I intend to continue running NW servers for basic LAN services for years to come, gradually phasing in OES/Linux as we go. This preserves our investment in Novell products and the training of our IT staff, while allowing us to move forward. (Novell has some great self-study kits for SuSE linux, btw. All you need is an old P-III or better box to use as a "classroom" server and away you go.) There are just too many advantages for a longtime Novell shop like us - not least of which is security - to consider migrating away.

Don't forget to factor in the cost of training as well as any ancillary or 3rd party tools that may have to be replaced as well. Also, remembering that Novell's direction is Linux, consider that if you were to go that way, there may be future savings in terms of the many free or low cost tools and applications that you can use on your servers. MS means staying proprietary which means $$ for anything you want to do. Your choice, like it or not, is really between two migration paths.

Good luck!

Both work well; it depends on your needs.

Like you, I?m a long time, certified Novell tech. Two years ago we purchased a full suite of MS licenses for all of our sites and setup a server in each. This was mostly for compatibility with specific software, not to completely replace the Novell servers already in place.

We ran through some classes to get familiar with the OS before we started and had no particular difficulty with installation and setup. The servers worked well and the differences between NDS and AD caused no problem once we got up to speed. We found them (AD/NDS) to be pretty much equivalent.

After almost two years running both I can say with confidence that the Novell servers require considerably less attention than the MS servers.

Novell servers are much more difficult to install initially, the GUI sucks in comparison to Windows and a Novell server is much less intuitive to work with than a Windows server.

Once up though, a Novell server will probably run forever unless there?s a hardware problem, whereas the MS servers usually need a reboot every few weeks for one reason or another. It?s not that big a big deal, but they do need the attention.

The MS servers are also vulnerable to infection with spyware and virus. Novell servers are immune from such threats since writing code (NLM?s) to infect them would be extremely difficult.

The bottom line:

Netware is harder to install, it can be an utter bitch to fix if it breaks and I hate the Novell client. Occasionally we?ve encountered problems that even our experienced (and certified) staff could not solve without Novell support or that required a manual rebuild of NDS.

The Windows servers aren?t much better. We?ve had to rebuild AD a couple of times and reload several of the servers when we had problems that just couldn?t be resolved. Patching MS servers is another weekly headache.

In the end, the nod goes to the Novell mainly due to their stability. While considerably more difficult to install, once up and running clean their extremely stable.

We have several locations separated by hundreds of miles with multiple Novell servers that have no resident technical staff. The servers in those locations run unattended (lights out) for years except for a yearly PM and update (if their lucky).

We had an old (end of life) backup server (Netware 4.11) that no one touched. When we finally took it down it had been up for 779 days non-stop. In contrast, the Windows servers need to be checked almost daily.

Novell servers are harder to work with but run forever. Windows servers are much easier to work with but lack Novell?s stability. Your choice depends on your network; for us, stability rules and we stuck with Novell.

Al

I have every Novell CNx cert that has been issued since 3 to 6.x; including Master CNE. I also was in the first 10k MCSE's ever certified, on NT 3.51. I re-certified on Win 2k with the complete curriculum over again. I'm also an MCDBA. Wow, ain't that impressive?? (I'm not looking for a job) Only reason I say this is to let you know that I am equally invested in both sides of the fence from a technical standpoint. I've almost always worked in an outsourced capacity during my 15 yr career. I've been in many businesses that have switched from NetWare to Windows as their server OS, businesses large and small. I ALWAYS ask why. Not to the lead tech, but to the business stakeholder. The answer is invariably some form of, "we're not comfortable with Novell's market position relative to M$." "Are there technical reasons?" - I always ask. "Well, we like having a GUI on the server for easy administration" or something as shortsighted. Okay - now for the actual answer to your question, or at least Some things to consider.... Login scripts. If you're like most NetWare shops you've enjoyed the rich scripting abilities of NetWare. Kiss'em goodbye. Get ready to toil over Kixstart or writing huge batch files. Drive Mappings. Chances are you've enjoyed nice things like "MAP ROOT" commands to hide higher level directory structures. Bu-bye. You've more than likely become very good at setting the file permissions in the servers' directory structures, even done some IRF's. Mapping the NetWare rights to the AD/Win rights is not an overnight matter for several thousand users. Perhaps you haven't enforced globally unique names for users in your tree, (eDirectory doesn't enforce uniqueness globally, just in the OU users reside, AD enforces global uniqueness.) You now need to spend the time finding the dupes (if any) and telling them that their login (or logon??) name is changing. Perhaps you have enjoyed having awesome control of where replicas of certain partitions in the tree are... A nice to have for network performance and redundancy. Show this to the Mgr /decision maker; - make a new partition in your eDir tree, and put replicas of that parition on 3 or 4 servers. Wait for confirmation that it is done. Now do the same thing in Windows (with native tools). Yikes! Worried about the health of the eDir tree? in one replica ring? Run NDSREPAIR! Now get the same feedback from Windows that the directory is healthy? - Okay, if that sounded too much like M$ bashing, I'm sorry, but to me there is no comparison; but there is compromise. MS SQL Server (yes, and even IIS, if its version 6) have a very nice stack for applicaiton development, if that is what you are after. If you are after giving your users a comfortable, consistent work experience in the file & print world, and giving your admins the same, to me there is no question. Also - look at Novell's Identity Manager products as a means of managing and mitigating the combined use of AD and eDirectory. It's the bomb! Good luck! Keep to the facts. Oh yea, in case you didn't know, Novell's CEO said at Brainshare this year, that NetWare would be supported until 2015. I hope that helps!