1.

Solve : Networking with Ubuntu...?

Answer»

Hi guys,

Just wondering how I would go about it...

At the moment I'm not setting ONE up, but in future it would be nice to know how to.

Example, I know for MS Networks, anything over 10 machines really needs a Windows Server platform in it, is there a similar cap in Linux/Ubuntu?

Also, the "Server Edition"...is that just for web-servers or am I way too naive?

Once I get some funds together to build a decent machine, I'd like to set-up a virtual network, and maybe one-day roll one out properly...

Is it straight forward?What are you really trying to do?

Re this statement: "I know for MS Networks, anything over 10 machines really needs a Windows Server platform in it". That's just not the case.

Ubuntu server is more geared towards server use - file server, web server, database server, etc, etc. The desktop edition is more geared towards desktop use - GUI, etc. But you can install any Ubuntu package on either edition. It simply gives you a more appropriate starting point, without any limitation.

Setting up networking is very straightforward, but you may find it helps if you understand the concepts contained >here<.For networking linux with windows you will need to configure samba. Samba can be set up as a client to a windows network (workgroup or domain). I haven't set up samba as a domain controller, but I think it can be configured that way as well.
It can although full Active Directory integration is some way up. Having SAID that, Microsoft recently (amazingly) gave some technical specs for AD to the Samba team, so we can expect some very interesting developments on that front in the near future.Quote from: Rob Pomeroy on January 15, 2008, 05:48:16 AM

What are you really trying to do?

Re this statement: "I know for MS Networks, anything over 10 machines really needs a Windows Server platform in it". That's just not the case.

Well, atm, nothing. But I'd like to design (and possibly implement (virtually)) a pure linux network, and also a mixed network...just for the exercise really.

How do you mean? The workgroup function in XP only works for upto 10 machines...after that you need a Server OS in the network for all the machines to see & speak to each other...don't you?Quote from: Sid on January 15, 2008, 05:01:50 PM
The workgroup function in XP only works for upto 10 machines...after that you need a Server OS in the network for all the machines to see & speak to each other...don't you?
No, not at all. Where did you read that? Are you thinking of the standard 5/10 user licences you get with a Windows Server install?Quote from: Rob Pomeroy on January 17, 2008, 10:36:35 AM
Quote from: Sid on January 15, 2008, 05:01:50 PM
The workgroup function in XP only works for upto 10 machines...after that you need a Server OS in the network for all the machines to see & speak to each other...don't you?
No, not at all. Where did you read that? Are you thinking of the standard 5/10 user licences you get with a Windows Server install?

No no...

When you've got basic XP machines (for ex lets say XP Pro), as I understood it, you could only join 10 machines to one workgroup (p2p network) at anyone time. After that you'd need to setup a server/client network, with a NOS installed.Nope, that's just not correct. There is no such limitation. You can have hundreds of computers (or more) joined to the same workgroup. Whether you'd want to do it that way though - that's a different matter.Quote from: Rob Pomeroy on January 18, 2008, 02:39:52 AM
Nope, that's just not correct. There is no such limitation. You can have hundreds of computers (or more) joined to the same workgroup. Whether you'd want to do it that way though - that's a different matter.

Without a Network operating system in the mix?

On windows XP...really?Quote from: Sid on January 18, 2008, 11:01:24 AM

Without a Network operating system in the mix?

On windows XP...really?


Is this the thing you are referring to?... or at least related to it?

http://support.microsoft.com/kb/314882
Some interesting reading here:

http://www.bcmaven.com/networking/myths.htm

Amongst the things mentioned is the 5/10 computer item.
I can't vouch for the validity of the statements there.
Before you accept it as gospel truth, let's wait and see what Rob says about that page.

Quote from: WillyW on January 18, 2008, 11:41:05 AM
Quote from: Sid on January 18, 2008, 11:01:24 AM

Without a Network operating system in the mix?

On windows XP...really?


Is this the thing you are referring to?... or at least related to it?

http://support.microsoft.com/kb/314882

Yeah.Quote from: WillyW on January 18, 2008, 11:44:44 AM
Before you accept it as gospel truth, let's wait and see what Rob says about that page.

Seems kosher to me.

This is the real question, isn't it?

Quote from: Rob Pomeroy on January 15, 2008, 05:48:16 AM
What are you really trying to do?

If you need a (file/print/web/etc.) server, use a server O/S. But you can have as many non-server computers in a workgroup as you like.Quote from: Rob Pomeroy on January 19, 2008, 12:08:01 AM
Quote from: WillyW on January 18, 2008, 11:44:44 AM
Before you accept it as gospel truth, let's wait and see what Rob says about that page.

Seems kosher to me.

This is the real question, isn't it?

Quote from: Rob Pomeroy on January 15, 2008, 05:48:16 AM
What are you really trying to do?

If you need a (file/print/web/etc.) server, use a server O/S. But you can have as many non-server computers in a workgroup as you like.

Ta very much for clearing that all up!

I take it Ubuntu Server Edition is suitable for file/print server/client topographies, or do you not really need to bother?

Example:
20 Machines, 10 printers and Internet comes through a router into the LAN, could this be done with just Ubuntu desktop? It's better to let a server get on with the job of being a server rather than faffing AROUND with desktop applications (the obvious exception being TERMINAL server/thin client environments). And for this, you're best off starting with a server-optimised distribution. In my opinion, Ubuntu Server is good but CentOS is better for this.


Discussion

No Comment Found

Related InterviewSolutions