Hi Peter,
In reply #48 Jaye advised Nat that we're all learning here, and that axiom applies to me, too. Naturally.
In fact, the most informed experts that this industry has to offer are usually in a waffle state, as they explore the next set of policies, protocols, etc., as the 'net evolves, and they are also still learning. The best among them haven't even learned to ask the right questions yet, as the landscape changes before they can get the answers to their last questions solved, rendering those questions moot in many instances.
New ideas are being cannibalized at a faster rate than the rate of cannibalization taking place in the real world, as we try to anticipate what the next evolutionary steps might be. Of course, it's much easier to trash ideas than it is to trash extant networks, since ideas alone don't present the same dilemmas revolving around embedded investments. And therein lies the value of the experimental attributes of the 'net in its historic form, although I think that such basic levels of experimentation might be threatened now as commercialization has taken its toll in that respect.
This dilemma is a two-edged knife in many respects as we on the one hand expect to see new and exciting things evolving through experimentation, and on the other hand we become more demanding of the 'net in terms of quality of service and reliability.
I read the North American Network Operators Group (NANOG), routinely, and I also try to keep up with Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF) proceedings, albeit not as much as I'd like to, or should, perhaps. I am constantly amazed by the cause and effect of some issues (parameters, protocols, design approaches) which seem entirely unrelated to one another on one level of application administration as they might apply to certain classes of applications, but at the same time are altogether and inextricably linked to one another on entirely different levels of networking for those same application types.
My post to you was not meant to show you how smart I am. Rather, it was my way of demonstrating a sampling of what those other considerations are that I, in fact, do not have the answers to. I was laying out some pieces to a grand puzzle on the table hoping that you would offer to piece them together for us. It's to your credit that you responded in such as way that demonstrates that you are a good sport.
Novell is indeed many of the things that you imply, especially w.r.t. their NDS in enterprise situations. I'd like to say that I'm versed in its integration with LDAP and other proposed directory solutions, but I'd only be winging it at best. Maybe someone else could illuminate on this matter for us. Anyone? And when that anyone replies with said enlightenment, please keep in mind the mixed company, i.e., the mixed backgrounds of those lurking here, when choosing your favorite acronyms.
Regards, Frank Coluccio |
