Active Directory Alternative

K

KuJaX

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Jan 8, 2001
Messages
15,778
We are looking at setting up a localized file sharing server. Since we need to have security in place for group policy we believe that an active directory approach is necessary. So my question to all of you is active directory alternatives. I know that linux has some ldap, but is it easy to setup or have the same functionality when mixed in with Samba? Is there some other commercial type products (I read some stuff about ClearOS, but no experience and can't find anyone that has experience with it).

MS active direct is nice, but with licensing costs for basically utilizing only file sharing seems a little excessive...... unless it is the only game in town. ;(

Suggestions, comments, experiences?
 
How many people are you talking about here, User CAL's for server 2012 are not that much when it comes down to it.
 
KuJaX said:
Not too many, ~20.

Aren't they like $30 to $50 a piece?
Click to expand...

But take that price and spread it out across 5-10 years that you'll likely be in the platform. There are plenty of SMB people I know running 2003 still.

I'd need to check the price, but using your #'s @ $30-$50 come up to $600-$1000 for 20.

That only $120-200/yr across 5 years. Or $10-17/mo~, which is cheap as fuck IMO.
 
MikeTrike said:
But take that price and spread it out across 5-10 years that you'll likely be in the platform. There are plenty of SMB people I know running 2003 still.

I'd need to check the price, but using your #'s @ $30-$50 come up to $600-$1000 for 20.

That only $120-200/yr across 5 years. Or $10-17/mo~, which is cheap as fuck IMO.
Click to expand...

It isn't expensive, I agree, but it is also donating to the evil empire! :)
 
KuJaX said:
It isn't expensive, I agree, but it is also donating to the evil empire! :)
Click to expand...

Well if the evil empire makes a pretty good product. Though to be honest, I'd call Apple the evil empire these days.
 
KuJaX said:
It isn't expensive, I agree, but it is also donating to the evil empire! :)
Click to expand...

No offense here, but your the kind of people that I have to come in and clean up after.

MS makes a very good server product, Software license will cost you under $2k if you get a good reseller. Thats not asking to much for the functionality you get
 
k1pp3r said:
No offense here, but your the kind of people that I have to come in and clean up after.

MS makes a very good server product, Software license will cost you under $2k if you get a good reseller. Thats not asking to much for the functionality you get
Click to expand...


You should thank me then.... for keeping you in business ;)

I'll have to weigh in the pro's and con's of doing MS AD versus some LDAP type scenario. There may not even be enough benefits in either route to justify the time investment
 
If you're managing users -- group policy alone is worth the time to deploy AD.
 
KuJaX said:
You should thank me then.... for keeping you in business ;)

I'll have to weigh in the pro's and con's of doing MS AD versus some LDAP type scenario. There may not even be enough benefits in either route to justify the time investment
Click to expand...

Time investment? I can have a basic domain controller up, configured and shares setup in a just a few hours. I build some fudge factor in there just for issues but there is no huge time loss putting in a Windows file server
 
I have played with quite a few other alternatives. Really nothing touches active directory for this type of setup.

For a basic DC/File server setup, it does not take long at all to deploy. Especially with Server 2012.
 
Yeah, the more I think about this. The more solidified I am in saying stick with Active Directory.

Now if you said Exchange Alternative, I can totally understand doing that.
 
Thanks for the comments everyone. It is nice to look at alternatives, but it seems like MS owns the space for the features.

For a moment I was thinking it may be possible to have a dedicated normal Windows 7 box that has a shared folder and then just use workgroup (not domain) to share the folder to appropriate users on the same workgorup. But probably over time more issues with managing if more users, group policy, etc
 
That'll work, but your life will be super easy if you go AD. If you're going to go the simple route for now, just get a NAS with basic features like print server, shared folders, etc. I use a QNAP at home and it's legit. I map a shared drive to all of my computers (Z:\ drive) and all of our shared data gets dumped in there across gig or wifi. :)
 
If you are right at 20 users I wouldn't really recomend this but server essentials is like 500 bucks and is licensed for up to 25 users. That is a hard limit on it though.

Anyway MS really owns the field with AD. You have other solutions but none really work as well. Tie it with other features like wsus for security updates, scripting via gpo, redirecting folders/profiles to push them from one place(easy backups), etc.
 
swatbat said:
If you are right at 20 users I wouldn't really recomend this but server essentials is like 500 bucks and is licensed for up to 25 users. That is a hard limit on it though.

Anyway MS really owns the field with AD. You have other solutions but none really work as well. Tie it with other features like wsus for security updates, scripting via gpo, redirecting folders/profiles to push them from one place(easy backups), etc.
Click to expand...

i didnt know the difference of server versions. Thanks for the info. Essentials may work out well until we get to that 25 user point, but when we get to that point hopefully the $500 is just throw away money. Do you know if each user needs its own server 2012 user license CAL when using server essentials?
 
KuJaX said:
i didnt know the difference of server versions. Thanks for the info. Essentials may work out well until we get to that 25 user point, but when we get to that point hopefully the $500 is just throw away money. Do you know if each user needs its own server 2012 user license CAL when using server essentials?
Click to expand...

Essentials does not us cals.

Now if you go past 25 it means buying everything. Hit 26 users and it is standard with 26 cals.

Edit: The only 2012 install's I've done are with standard so I can't speak to all of the limits of essentials, you should do some research on it though. Pretty cheap overall for a smaller setup.
 
Research 2012 essentials, they changed a lot with it and I think you can go up to 50 users with a pack or something. (maybe buying server std? Cant remember exactly at the moment).

Active Directory is MS's baby, it is one thing they do REALLY well. Yes it is complex at times, but the amount of things you can do with it require that. It really is a fully customizable directory that has to fit into millions of different configurations seamlessly.
 
I know that Samba4 comes with full AD integration. Might be something to look into.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top