I plan to set up my first Linux network. I also hope to set one up to be as good as and on par with a Windows network.

I plan to use OpenLDAP to allow me to access the various servers. Likewise, I also plan to install a NIS server to authenticate users. What more is needed to set up this network to make it on par with a Windows network?

In Windows network, you have a Windows server running as a domain controller connected to a switch. All other Windows Professional computers are also connected to the switch as workstations.

What is needed for my Linux network to achieve this? I don't think we need a DNS server for a LAN, do we? A DHCP is also unnecessary, isn't it?

Sorry if text gets changed I'm doing this from my phone.

Well to be able to tell you how to setup your network we would need to know how many users and how many workstations. What type of security is needed etc...

Next yes you LAN needs a DNS to connect to weather it be provided by your ISP or your firewall but if you want the flexibility of windows then yes you will want a DNS Server.

Last OpenSuse and Suse can actually act as a domain controller for your entire windows network. I can or personally say how well it works but Microsoft has partenered and in a way Bought Novell to have suse be the first Linux to be as integratable with Windows as possible at the moment.

Look into the two above suggestions and get a better overview of what the network architecture is like and than reply.

Well I plan to have a basic network. Perhaps 5 computers and also about 5 users. Other than the system administrator, the rest only need normal security level.

No the flexibility of Windows is not necessary. We are only dealing with Linux.

Thanks.

At the risk of sounding like a Linux fanboy, if you want your network to have all the features of Windows, you could run it at half speed, and disable some services.

Seriously, though, if you use OpenLDAP/NIS for user authentication, you set up one authentication server (like you'd set up a domain controller), and then your other systems connect to it. That's it. You have MORE flexibility with Linux/Unix than with Windows. Out of the box, Windows doesn't do NFS, or have support for as many file systems (try to get a Windows box to read a disk formatted with EXT4, or ReiserFS, or HFS). The worst thing you can do is to start out trying to make something into something it's not. Linux has its own strong and weak points, just as Windows does, but don't think of them as the same. Look at the NEED, then get the best tool to get that job done.

Ur first post says you want it to run like a windows network if that's what u want u use a domain controller if u wan Linux on ur windows network for other services you will want to start NIS in active directory so users can authenticate to the server with policies in place and if you want Linux servers running the network and windows machines on the user end there's a plethora of options. Pfsense as an opensource enterprise firewall/router is great plus it's based from freeBSD so u can customize it to do a lot more this thing has all the bells and whistles you'll need to run you network win enough storage it can be you NFS or Samba Server it can act as a web host.

0 members found this post helpful.

No, that's not what the OP posted...in their follow-up post, it clearly says that the Linux and Windows networks will be separate.

And don't use that text-speak garbage....your post is almost impossible to read and understand.

2 members found this post helpful.

And run all your network services as root.

As for the OP, I'd say that, since TCP/IP is platform independent, generally, any services you would want in your Windows network, you'd also want in your Linux network. The key is to figure out which services are part of normal TCP/IP and which are WinDoh!s specific.

For example, in your WinDoh!s environment, you have a domain controller, which is a WinDoh!s-specific concept. But what do you want it to do? A DC can provide default gateway, firewall, DHCP, and LDAP, all of which can be provided from a Linux server.

If this is a strictly Linux LAN, the then just use OpenLDAP for central auth http://www.linuxhomenetworking.com/w...DAP_and_RADIUS (ignore RADIUS section).
It'd be useful to know which distro you are going to use eg for RHEL/Centos http://www.linuxtopia.org/online_boo...ion/index.html.
Also list the reqd functionality and we'll tell you which services you need.

For one I'm using a phone to write these posts ...

0 members found this post helpful.

You also need to re read the first post and reread my post before posting an ignorant reply that does not even correct me properly

0 members found this post helpful.

I don't care if you are typing on a phone or an abacus, that texting slang is hard to read, please don't use it. At LQ there is an understanding and expectation that we spell out our words.

As far as the content of your post, I think your responses are way more abstract than what the OP is asking. Statements like: are only partially true and speak to a personal agenda to push a particular product. Perhaps Suse has special functions to act as a domain controller (I don't know that it does or doesn't) but any of the distributions can function as a domain controller. The domain controller functionality is provided by Samba, which is the application that brings Windows networking to Linux. Your comments about recommending pfsense for enterprise applications and samba as a web host(??) will likely just send the OP down the garden path of lack of understanding of important fundamentals of Linux networking, which they clearly require.

In reverse order:

• A DHCP server is unnecessary, but may be more convenient, particularly if you have, eg, laptops that join this network and then go away. if it is all permanently wired desktop-type computers and not many of them, there probably isn't a worthwhile advantage.
• DNS server? Well, someone, somewhere, needs a DNS server for your browser to be able to use a human-friendly addresses (URLs) rather than IP addresses. But normally that's just a matter of using an external service (eg, your ISP's DNS servers or a third-party equivalent from someone like OpenDNS), so you don't need to do anything to run your own server, if you don't want to.

some extra information:

• If you want to address, say, your print server by name, then you'd need either a DNS server, or a little bit of hacking with files on each computer. With a small number of static desktops, you don't need anything other than hand-editing a few files, but you could go to the more scalable DNS solution if you wanted to.
• You might choose to cache DNS look-ups to improve performance, but you don't have to.
• Your router, or ADSL interface, is probably able to use a protocol like mDNS to allow much of the network to auto-configure the basics of networking. You don't have to use it, but you could - maybe you actually are using it, with or without knowing it.
• You could use DNSMasq for caching DNS look-ups and for DHCP (although you may not want both DNSMasq and some other piece of networking equipment doing DHCP at the same time), and DNSMasq is quite easy to set up, too.
• The site, linuxhomequestions, mentioned by chrism01 above in connection with setting up LDAP has a lot of other information, too. I'd be surprised if anything that you need isn't there, although it might be a bit much at first (don't try to read all of it all at once).

@TB0ne
Don't you also have to break a few RFCs at random and in subtle ways, introduce a few security problems, and generally ensure that things are only really interoperable with your own, rfc-breaking, embrace-and-extend, pseudo-standards, while you are there? You might also want to include some half-thought-out stuff, so that version two could fix the obvious problems, while only being partly compatible with version one, so that people have to upgrade (where upgrade = pay, of course, not that the money has anything to do with it. Err, obviously.) to get the new features.

(Sorry, I'm sure that has done little or nothing to help the Original Poster, but I am afraid that I couldn't resist.)

1 members found this post helpful.

@TB0ne and Salasi: Lets not forget that event logging absolutely must be treated like an afterthought. All of the logged information, must be categorized as numerical hex code events such as event type 0x562 and information such as the user account that attempted access must be provided in obfuscated format like Login ID (0x0, 0x3F7) where these numbers have absolutely no index to correlate them to a actual user. Worse, this user ID shall be common amongst all Windows installations and it shall not be documented anywhere as to its source. The help files shall say, "contact your system administrator" which is great when you ARE the system administrator. Lets also insist that the IP address of the connecting host be left out and that the only designation be that it was a network login using Kerberos credentials for GUID {0x31941233 0xA49CD3, 0x914592A94CDE093412004}.

Yes, this is off topic, but it is a real example of what I have been dealing with the last couple of days while trying to track down a potential compromise into a Windows system. It is also why you can consider me a "fan boy" of Linux.

I did read it, did you?? As I said, the OP's follow up states the two will be separate. And as others have said, it doesn't matter what you're typing on, your post is hard to read and understand, and in no way provided any sort of guidance to the OP.

I totally agree, and I've had to deal with that very thing also. Unless you are in a Windows-only shop, and will NEVER have to deal with anything other than a Windows system, Linux/unix is MUCH better and more robust. You have all the tools you need to deal with pretty much anything, rather than playing "find the mystery dialog box", or "hunt for the elusive registry key", to make things half-way work. Syslogging is a perfect example...a well documented standard, but one that Windows doesn't support. You CAN shoehorn some third-party tool in, but you won't get everything, and it's buggy.