MS and Novell square off over NDS
Microsoft tosses directory curveballs on eve of Novell's BrainShare conference.
By Scott Berinato, PC Week Online, and Mary Jo Foley, Sm@rt Reseller, PC Week
March 16, 1999 3:09 PM PT
Microsoft Corp. is throwing high heat in an attempt to brush back Novell Inc.'s power hitter, Novell Directory Services version 8.
Novell's (Nasdaq:NOVL) user conference, BrainShare, which opens next week, will prominently feature the forthcoming NDS v.8 as the company's platform of the future. CEO Eric Schmidt's keynote is expected to include a demonstration of network management via NDS v.8, ZenWorks and a third-party application from Oblix Inc.
But this week, Microsoft (Nasdaq:MSFT) is making several announcements apparently intended to take some mind share from BrainShare.
Chin music
A little more than a year ago, Microsoft and Novell sparred over whether Microsoft would support Novell's NDS for NT implementation. Microsoft rekindled the fire today with a "market bulletin," which calls into question the capabilities of Novell's NDS for NT.
It also hints that Novell will need to make major changes to the software if it is to work with Windows 2000 and other platforms yet to be general released, such as the next Exchange e-mail server, code-named Platinum.
"NDS for NT's architecture has significant deployment limitations and does not 'directory-enable' a Windows NT environment," the document states in its overview. "Microsoft believes that NDS for NT 2.0 delivers considerably less than the comprehensive and integrated Windows NT management solution that Novell markets it to be."
The document certainly sounds alarms for any IT manager considering using forthcoming Microsoft technologies like Windows 2000.
"To implement a redirection architecture for Windows 2000, Novell will have to replace all of the security and directory functionality that Active Directory services provide with similar functionality in NDS," the Microsoft market bulletin states. "Given that Active Directory provides significantly more functionality than the SAM (Security Account Manager) in Windows NT Server 4.0, including some that has no equivalent in NDS (e.g., Kerberos support), Microsoft believes that it will be difficult for Novell to deliver a redirector-based equivalent to NDS for NT 2.0 for Windows 2000."
One systems integrator that offers both Novell and Microsoft products said this will affect many current and potential customers.
"It's not a one or the other situation," said sales coordinator Bianca Miser of MicroServ Network in Dallas. "Usually, if we sell NT, we're also selling them Novell products. A lot of customers are getting NT servers but they're asking for NDS for directory services."
Novell officials in Provo, Utah, said the document was not surprising, and that Microsoft is prone to such actions right before a major Novell press event.
"At this point ... people don't take this stuff very seriously," said Novell product marketing manager Samm DiStasio. "It's an expected tactic. We have bigger things to worry about, like what do our customers want us to build? Part of our mission is to make their stuff better. Our customers understand that. I'm not sure they do."
DiStasio said any potential pitfalls with NDS for NT would also befall NT 4.0-to-Windows 2000 migration.
"The upgrade risks are garbage if you have migration tools," he said. "If Microsoft doesn't have migration tools, their NT 4.0 users will face the same problems."
DiStasio added that Novell built NDS for NT without published specifications on the NT directory structure.
"The good news here is that with nothing published, we built the product with NT domains. This time, they're going to publish Active Directory domain structures, so we're well down the road with an updated product," he said. "We're smart people. We can figure these things out."
Not in Sync
Also on Tuesday, Microsoft submitted its DirSync technology to the Internet Engineering Task Force, injecting it into the directory synchronization standards process.
DirSync is part of Active Directory's synchronization scheme. Applied to a heterogeneous directory environment, it would accomplish much of what the proposed LDUP (LDAP Duplication Protocol) standard is supposed to address. LDUP includes NDS technology and was developed by Novell, Netscape Communications Corp. (Nasdaq:NSCP) and others.
Both DirSync and LDUP would allow disparate directories to synchronize data between each other.
"I don't know yet, to be honest, what the differences between LDUP and DirSync are," said DiStasio. "But the way I read it so far, LDUP is in the standards track and DirSync will be free but is not actually on a standards track."
Microsoft Directory Product Manager Peter Houston acknowledges the work being done by the LDUP committee but said DirSync "expands the discussion."
"I see this as being complementary to work [already being done] with standards," said Houston. "Our motivation was that we saw the work going on in LDUP and thought it could use some new ideas. We decided a lot of DirSync could contribute new ideas into the standards efforts."
Pressed on whether DirSync competed with LDUP, Houston said, "The missions of LDUP and DirSync are very much the same."
The standards process appears to have become a political battleground. Many users and observers believe directory decisions in the enterprise are as important or more important than operating system decisions.
While the standards' technical minutiae are haggled over, users and developers have resigned themselves to a fractured market that won't ensure interoperability.
"We tried to write to a pure LDAP environment, but quickly -- very, very quickly -- gave up," said Robert Drescher, vice president of marketing at Oblix, of Mountain View, Calif. Oblix has a directory application and plans to support all major directories with it.
To do that, the company will have to do vendor-specific development as the standards will not ensure the product works.
"If you want to work in the directory space, you have to work with each vendor," Drescher said. "Standards are important. They get you 90 percent of the way there, but you still need to work one on one with each directory vendor."
zdnet.com |
