Difference between revisions of "Centralized Authentication Proposal"
(Created page with 'While implementing the BCFG2 configuration management system on the build farm, the prospect of having a passwd, shadow and groups file controlled by the utility was brought up s…') |
|||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
| − | While implementing the BCFG2 configuration management system on the build farm, the prospect of having a passwd, shadow and | + | While implementing the BCFG2 configuration management system on the build farm, the prospect of having a passwd, shadow and group file controlled by the utility was brought up several times. While this is one method of managing a consistent set of users and groups across the build farm, I feel that there is other software available that would be better suited for this task. |
| + | '''NIS+''' | ||
| + | '''OpenLDAP/389 Directory''' | ||
| − | + | '''Kerberos/Heimdall''' | |
| − | + | '''Other''' | |
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | Other | ||
Revision as of 15:21, 23 April 2012
While implementing the BCFG2 configuration management system on the build farm, the prospect of having a passwd, shadow and group file controlled by the utility was brought up several times. While this is one method of managing a consistent set of users and groups across the build farm, I feel that there is other software available that would be better suited for this task.
NIS+
OpenLDAP/389 Directory
Kerberos/Heimdall
Other
