How is Linux(SUSE) better at being a server / networking OS?

English Network/Internet
#1

Okay, I know openSUSE (and SUSE Enterprise) work great with windows Active Directory.

Now, I understand that Linux systems are far more stable and secure (if configured properly). What about features though? What does openSUSE/Linux have instead of AD for file/folder sharing across the network? Are there roaming profiles? If so, how do I use that?

I love openSUSE because of yast (and a few other things). And It’s my main LinuxOS on my tower. I am still in college getting my certs and a degree (in networking). I really want to understand why Linux (openSUSE/SUSE enterprise) is a better networking solution as opposed to Windows Sever 2003/2008.

Also, why SUSE over RHEL/CentOS? Yast is awesome, but are there other reasons?

I know that’s a lot to ask in one post. Feel free to include links so you won’t have to type too much.

I’d like both personal opinions, hard facts, and just general user experiences as to the features that make Linux (openSUSE) better, not just the stability and security. Thanks.

#2

keljaden wrote:

>
> Okay, I know openSUSE (and SUSE Enterprise) work great with windows
> Active Directory.
>
> Now, I understand that Linux systems are far more stable and secure
> (if configured properly). What about features though? What does
> openSUSE/Linux have instead of AD for file/folder sharing across the
> network? Are there roaming profiles? If so, how do I use that?
>
> I love openSUSE because of yast (and a few other things). And It’s my
> main LinuxOS on my tower. I am still in college getting my certs and
> a degree (in networking). I really want to understand why Linux
> (openSUSE/SUSE enterprise) is a better networking solution as opposed
> to Windows Sever 2003/2008.

cost, flexibility, ease of use, scriptability, support.

–
Per Jessen, Zürich (22.2°C)
http://en.opensuse.org/User:pjessen

#3

They both seem rather easy to use for me. Linux has shell scripts and windows has batch files.

I am looking at features though. Like how does Linux handle Roaming User Profiles? What does SUSE linux provide that Windows does not on the feature side. Or what is there equivalent.

I am not asking gimp = photoshop, but like what is the opensuse way of Active Directory…etc. (and I know openSUSE has samba, but is there generic linux file sharing?)

#4

LDAP is the most commonly used central authentication system used in Unix / Linux multi user environments. Check out the Suse LDAP server which is very easy to use through Yast.

As for roaming profiles, you could use auto-mounted home directories. This makes it so that whenever you login into to a system your remote /home is mounted locally. While handy, this does have some limitations - for example, programs may not be available locally, though there are often many ways to work with this, such as X forwarding an applications, etc. Also, you could look into something like the Linux Terminal Server Project which is very cool.

In a multi-user, networked environmnet the question of “which is better” can be very complex. Some applications expect / require MS SQL and / or AD to function, so you then might end up with two authentication servers, or having to tie AD and LDAP together. However, in simple deployments, if you want Suse to be your authentication server, provided shared folders via NFS, etc. I think you will find it works extremely well. You can also do some pretty fancy stuff with a Linux server on the network, such as having it act as a router, server distributed file systems, use fancy things like IPV4 anycast for building in redundancy using IP and routing advertisements, etc.

RHEL has a HUGE install base, and many third party applications are available for it. That does not mean they won’t run on Suse, but they may not be officially supported. However, at a fundamental level, it is really just all about choice. If Suse suites your needs - great. There is no benefit to using RHEL over it. However, if you want to use SE Linux (new and only partially implemented in Suse) then CentOS / RHEL is the way to go. If you have software that is officially supported on one platform and not the other, then that is that. But a great majority of the time it simply comes down to what people are familiar and comfortable with.

Cheers,
Lews Therin

#5

Thank you so much! That’s what I am looking for.

Where do you recommend I go to learn about setting up LDAP and how to make it auto mount home directories? Also, If this is the case, would I have an generic admin home directory on the client system…then another “user specific” home directory on the server? How does SUSE know what directory to use? Does the login specify that information?

Thanks again though. That info was very helpful.

#6

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Linux in general has several options for file sharing; Samba for the SMB
protocol (also known as windows-based file sharing, and the only thing
windows natively supports being the inferior OS it is), plus it also
allows file sharing via NFS (which is probably older than you are and a
great performer due to how lightweight it is), SCP/SFTP (which work over
SSH which every OS supports natively… except windows), plus AFP (Apple
File Protocol) when you get into the enterprise products such as Novell’s
Open Enterprise Server (which is based on SLES; there may be ways to share
with apple computers without using SMB and without OES, but I don’t know
about them; Google for options in this area).

If you need windows file sharing then I guess your best bet is to go with
SMB but do you really need that? This roaming profile stuff probably
quires the use of MAD as well which is possible without a microsoft server
(specifically Novell has Domain Services for Windows, again in their
enterprise server product, which emulates MAD on Linux for these types of
situations) but if you setup your environment properly there’s no reason
for any of this. Using Yast you can easily point your workstations to
LDAP-based servers (available on Linux out of the box) and then also use
AutoFS to automatically mount home directories properly. The end result
is your users can sit down at any of your workstations and login with
their username and seamlessly have access to their home directories,
preferences, etc. all hosted on a server somewhere out in your network.
Single-sign-on is also an option with Kerberos which is nice. This is all
something you can do out of the box for free.

Using windows workstation will increase your costs; you’ll need more
hardware, you’ll need to pay for windows, you’ll need anti-virus software,
office software, and you’ll need some kind of MAD implementation (to
handle the authentication and file sharing). You’re locked in with this
solution but it is also a solution. If you have the budget to waste on
that type of solution then go for it (I wouldn’t recommend it though, in
case that wasn’t obvious).

Why SUSE over others? Yast is a good reason, especially for setting up
things like the server-side processes such as LDAP. With that said RedHat
isn’t a bad distribution and Linux will work with Linux (as well as just
about anything else) regardless of what you choose. This is the joy of
the open-source world. It is in our best interest to work with eachother
and compete based on functionality more than on an established monopoly
(which is, by definition, not competition).

Since you were after personal stuff too, I use RedHat (Fedora mostly) as
well as OpenSUSE and SLES (SUSE Linux Enterprise Server). I prefer the
SUSE-based distributions and Yast is better than RedHat’s alternatives,
especially when you are working without a full X session. I’m more-used
to the SUSE side so I may have some bias there (plus, in case you didn’t
notice, my e-mail address should be an indication about my
potentially-subjective communication). I’ve used Linux full time for,
well, around ten years. The platform is superior in everything it
provides; its biggest setback is support for drivers (though I haven’t had
to experience that for several years; maybe I’m just lucky) and
application support (though monopoly has helped the competition in that
regard, and there are a ton of ways to work around that with emulation and
cross-platform development frameworks such as Java and even Mono. As the
technology standards are becoming more popular, and especially as
applications are becoming increasingly browser-based, a lot of these
factors are negated. Vendors increasingly create drivers for Linux for
their hardware (and open-source drivers exist for just about everything
until then for the exceptions) and applications via the browser work
regardless of platform, browser, etc.

Hopefully that helps.

Good luck.

On 08/19/2010 08:36 AM, keljaden wrote:
>
> Okay, I know openSUSE (and SUSE Enterprise) work great with windows
> Active Directory.
>
> Now, I understand that Linux systems are far more stable and secure (if
> configured properly). What about features though? What does
> openSUSE/Linux have instead of AD for file/folder sharing across the
> network? Are there roaming profiles? If so, how do I use that?
>
> I love openSUSE because of yast (and a few other things). And It’s my
> main LinuxOS on my tower. I am still in college getting my certs and a
> degree (in networking). I really want to understand why Linux
> (openSUSE/SUSE enterprise) is a better networking solution as opposed to
> Windows Sever 2003/2008.
>
> Also, why SUSE over RHEL/CentOS? Yast is awesome, but are there other
> reasons?
>
> I know that’s a lot to ask in one post. Feel free to include links so
> you won’t have to type too much.
>
> I’d like both personal opinions, hard facts, and just general user
> experiences as to the features that make Linux (openSUSE) better, not
> just the stability and security. Thanks.
>
>
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v2.0.15 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/
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=IEDz
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

#7

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

See my other response. Just as a note though… DOS (and yes, they are
from DOS) batch files are not comparable to *nix shell scripts for two
reasons and maybe this addresses your second paragraph below: first, bash
(or any other non-DOS shell) provides a lot more functionality than DOS
ever did; second, the command line (which bash can use) has more
functionality in any of many individual commands (grep, awk, sed, all of
Perl, etc.) than all of DOS. Comparing a Model T Ford to a Bugatti would
probably be appropriate, except that DOS isn’t nearly as cool as an
original Model T.

Good luck.

On 08/19/2010 09:36 AM, keljaden wrote:
>
> They both seem rather easy to use for me. Linux has shell scripts and
> windows has batch files.
>
> I am looking at features though. Like how does Linux handle Roaming
> User Profiles? What does SUSE linux provide that Windows does not on the
> feature side. Or what is there equivalent.
>
> I am not asking gimp = photoshop, but like what is the opensuse way of
> Active Directory…etc. (and I know openSUSE has samba, but is there
> generic linux file sharing?)
>
>
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v2.0.15 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/
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=J9AJ
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

#8

keljaden wrote:

>
> They both seem rather easy to use for me. Linux has shell scripts and
> windows has batch files.

“seem”? You ought to take a closer look if you really want to know.

> I am looking at features though.

Nitpick - operating systems don’t actually provide many features, their
respective applications do that.

> Like how does Linux handle Roaming User Profiles? What does SUSE linux
> provide that Windows does not on the feature side. Or what is there
> equivalent.
>
> I am not asking gimp = photoshop, but like what is the opensuse wayof
> Active Directory…etc. (and I know openSUSE has samba, but is there
> generic linux file sharing?)

Sorry, I haven’t used Windows since 2003, I don’t know how things are
done on Windows.

–
Per Jessen, Zürich (19.6°C)
http://en.opensuse.org/User:pjessen

#9

On Thu August 19 2010 11:06 am, keljaden wrote:

>
> Thank you so much! That’s what I am looking for.
>
> Where do you recommend I go to learn about setting up LDAP and how to
> make it auto mount home directories? Also, If this is the case, would I
> have an generic admin home directory on the client system…then another
> “user specific” home directory on the server? How does SUSE know what
> directory to use? Does the login specify that information?
>
> Thanks again though. That info was very helpful.
>
keljaden;

Samba 3 can be configured to emulate an NT domain, including roaming profiles.
Samba 4 is still considered to be experimental, but is very close to a stable
release for production systems, can be configured to emulate an AD domain,
including multiple DCs, roaming profiles etc.

–
P. V.
“We’re all in this together, I’m pulling for you.” Red Green

#10

The main point regarding “what makes linux/SUSE better at being a server/networking o/s?” is this, and I am surprised nobody said it before:

It complies with current standards. The LDAP server is LDAPv3 certified (OpenLDAP). The major networking services ARE the industry standard products - BIND DNS, MIT or Hiemdahl Kerberos V5, Apache, Tomcat, Radius, you name it - the industry-standard standards-based, standards-compliant services run on SLES (and other GNU/Linux distros.)

I may be repeating some stuff from others’ posts, but I just have to say this, all in one shot. Standards is the key, and open-source is the way to get it done right.

Windows is maybe 90% standards-compliant. Its DNS is not standard DNS - it has proprietary extensions. Its LDAP is not LDAPv3 certified because it’s got proprietary extensions. Go down the list of network services, and you will find that Windows’ versions of those services always have some proprietary twist.

As a file-sharing server platform, you can use Samba (as has been mentioned) or NFS (for *nix file sharing) or AFP (for Mac file sharing) or FTP/SFTP, or SSH/RSH, or webDAV…

As an application server platform, you have Apache/Tomcat, or many other flavors of Java app servers like JBoss, plus other app platforms like Liferay, etc.

As a database server platform you have heavy-duty database servers like PostgreSQL, MySQL, Sybase SQL Anywhere, Oracle, there may even be a DB2 port, Progress, etc.

You have many industry-standard, powerful scripting languages available like Perl, PHP, Ruby, etc.

You can program in just about any language (except Visual Basic) on Linux, and its standard language is C. With the oft-reviled Mono project you can even program in C# on Linux. There are many IDE’s available on Linux as well - you don’t have to do it all from the command line or text editor.

For print sharing you have the industry-standard CUPS, which stands for Common Unix Printing System, which was contributed by Apple. It supports many printing protocols including LPD and IPP and has PPDs for most of the network-enabled printers available today, from HP, Brother, Lexmark, Epson, etc. Through Samba, you can even distribute Windows printer drivers for CUPS printers.

#11

Actually IMHO a properly configured Windows 2008 server is on the whole safer than any Linux and definitely much safer than any OS X system. The problem is that it’s popular and prone to much more attacks, malware and so on being in fact less safe :stuck_out_tongue:

The other major problem with Windows is the licensing scheme as it’s very complex and in some of my friends experience, who work for companies that sale Windows for a living, it’s relatively easy to trick the clients into buying something that they don’t actually need or buying not enough (they would have to pay much more in the short term :slight_smile: but they don’t realize that yet).

On the bright side it’s true that Microsoft OSes use some proprietary exclusive implementation of some protocols but who cares if You use Windows only ? :slight_smile: In fact there are cases that those protocols actually work better than the ones complying to standards. (Cisco does this as well and see how popular they are in the market because their stuff just works) Compare this with for example Cisco’s opensource alternative Vyatta that can mostly do anything a Cisco can do but for free :slight_smile: (their markets share are very different and guess who’s the winner).

On the whole every OS has got it’s strong and weak points so the best way is to learn about both Linux and Windows and probably even Solaris, BSD and so on. The more You know the better as there are also similarities especially from an admin perspective.

Best regards,
Greg

#12

I totaly agree.

  • I’ve noticed that windows powershell has changed dramatically over the past several years. As an administrative tool, its become very versatile,
    ie. control integration with applications, exchange etc etc.
#13

On 03/25/2011 09:36 PM, glistwan wrote:
>
> Actually IMHO a properly configured Windows 2008 server is on the whole
> safer than any Linux and definitely much safer than any OS X system.

i guess you are saying that in three years they have been able to fix
all the soft spots?

“Hacker Bags Windows Server 2008 Trophy”
http://tinyurl.com/65hzh7m

lots more at:
http://tinyurl.com/6fwkay8

so, when will M$Server 2011 be ready for safe use?
(openSUSE 11.4 “properly configured” is good to go today!)

–
DenverD
CAVEAT: http://is.gd/bpoMD
[NNTP posted w/openSUSE 11.3, KDE4.5.5, Thunderbird3.1.8, nVidia
173.14.28 3D, Athlon 64 3000+]
“It is far easier to read, understand and follow the instructions than
to undo the problems caused by not.” DD 23 Jan 11

#14

I don’t think I’ve ever seen this much bull in a single sentence on these forums, ever.

Congratulations.

#15

Well it’s my personal opinion :slight_smile: I wonder why do You find it not true ?

Best regards,
Greg

#16

Well any software is bugged and always will be. And IMHO Linux PC’s can be hacked much easier than latest Windows but just no one bothers to do so. It’s the same story with Macs. All the time there was a belief (and still it’s there) that they are virus free don’t crash and so on. But guess what there was a bug in Leopard that erases your personal data :slight_smile: no such thing in Windows newer than Windows NT.
Snow Leopard Bug Erases Personal Data - www.esecurityplanet.com
And the more market share the more viruses arrive on Macs and somehow people realize that those are actually no safer than Windows and much worse protected cause of lack of for example anti virus software (as the people feel safe without it btw this plagues android and iphone OS and windows phone 7 as well but in case of windows phone 7 it’s like with Linux no one bothers to crack it because of market share :)). What’s more see check out Safari. IMHO in it’s amount of bugs it’s beaten only by IE 6.0.

As for Linux see Android story… or the latest bugs found that can be exploited when pluging USB devices into Linux or various CentOS hacks and ways to compromise security.

Best regards,
Greg

#17

On 03/26/2011 06:06 AM, glistwan wrote:
>
> Chrysantine;2312345 Wrote:
>> I don’t think I’ve ever seen this much bull in a single sentence on
>> these forums, ever.
>>
>> Congratulations.
> Well it’s my personal opinion :slight_smile: I wonder why do You find it not true
> ?

No matter how much lipstick you put on that pig, once you get an exploit on it,
it can run in administrative mode. That is a “feature” of Windows, no matter its
label. My personal experience is the basis for my opinion.

#18

On 03/26/2011 12:06 PM, glistwan wrote:

you have no legs to stand on…just look at how easily MS products
fall at every hack-fest since they began…

first they hack the Windows easily and quickly…
then they hack the Macs…

and then they spend the rest of the allotted time trying to find a
crack in Unix, AIX, Linux and other similar systems built from the
ground up as enterprise ready–rather than beginning with a home
desktop/game system and trying to make it into a secure system…

you will not shovel your stuff into here unopposed…

–
DenverD
CAVEAT: http://is.gd/bpoMD
[NNTP posted w/openSUSE 11.3, KDE4.5.5, Thunderbird3.1.8, nVidia
173.14.28 3D, Athlon 64 3000+]
“It is far easier to read, understand and follow the instructions than
to undo the problems caused by not.” DD 23 Jan 11

#19

Actually Macs go first usually but such test don’t prove anything IMHO as the best hacks are too valuable to show on such contest :slight_smile: I’ve read an article containing an interview with some famous internet browser cracker and they asked him which browser is the hardest to crack and the guy said that when using default setings IE 8 is the hardest one but once You install flash any browser is as easy to crack as any other. There is no difference. I’ve got no idea whether it’s true or not but it seems sensible to me.

Bes regards,
Greg