General discussion


Acitive Dir. vs Linux

By btibbetts ·
Eventualy we will upgrading to Acitve Dir. I do have one qestion we DO NOT use microsoft for DNS we use Linux and have no plans to change it. Can you still take advantage of Active dir with out binding it to DNS ?

This conversation is currently closed to new comments.

Thread display: Collapse - | Expand +

All Comments

Collapse -


by Jeromey In reply to Acitive Dir. vs Linux

Active directory requires DNS, you cant get around that. If you decide to use Unix DNS such as Bind, you need to make sure you have a version that will support dynamic updates. Bind 8.2x and higher will support dynamic updates.

Collapse -

Close but..

by Chris.. In reply to DNS

Yes you must have DNS..only so much in that the AD utilizes it before NETBIOS. Replication, FISMO components, and a whole list of other things.

What you missed is that there is NO requirement in AD for automatic or dynamic updating. It is just the perfered methode for those of us who hate manual management of DNS.

Another option is a child domain off of the primary. You can make that a DDNS system and just set the fowarders to only look at the Linux one.

There is some good stuff on this at the microsoft site, you might want to do that. You can also talk to the VAR you're buying from about some presales or postsales support.

Collapse -

SRV records

by Eric9 In reply to Close but..

I think what spinworm was referring to was the need for AD to use a DNS server that supports SRV records.

So the bare minimum would be making sure your DNS server can support SRV records; but dynamic updates is a very nice feature, although I do not know the security implications of doing dynamic updates to a BIND DNS server.


Collapse -

by djent In reply to Acitive Dir. vs Linux

Take a closer look at the new version of Samba.

Related Discussions

Related Forums