From owner-freebsd-questions Tue Sep 12 6:41: 2 2000 Delivered-To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Received: from 01.dhcp.hck.carroll.com (core1.hck.carroll.com [216.44.16.2]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id EAD4237B423 for ; Tue, 12 Sep 2000 06:41:00 -0700 (PDT) Received: (from damien@localhost) by 01.dhcp.hck.carroll.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) id JAA29252; Tue, 12 Sep 2000 09:42:31 -0400 (EDT) (envelope-from damien) Date: Tue, 12 Sep 2000 09:42:31 -0400 From: Damien Tougas To: Drew Sanford , cjclark@alum.mit.edu Cc: questions@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Passwords && loadbalancing && multiple machines (oh my) Message-ID: <20000912094231.C29216@carroll.com> References: <39BD16E9.E5D40A67@planetwe.com> <20000911233934.K69158@149.211.6.64.reflexcom.com> <39BD16E9.E5D40A67@planetwe.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.2.5i In-Reply-To: <39BD16E9.E5D40A67@planetwe.com>; from drew@planetwe.com on Mon, Sep 11, 2000 at 12:31:21PM -0500 Sender: owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG >Kerberos is not easy to configure and requires more resources. if you >are sharing between three machines, setting up a fourth to be the >server might not be worth it. I have used Kerberized environments, but >never built one from scratch. The plus: very strong security. But >whereas NIS is very weak, Kerberos can be overkill. The other problem with Kerberos is that it is used for authentication only, you still need /etc/passwd and /etc/group on every machine for authorization. -- Damien Tougas Systems Administrator Carroll-Net, Inc. http://www.carroll.com To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-questions" in the body of the message