RE: Looking for a mentor/adviser

> Craig,
>     Again you assume facts not stated, exchange wasn't a factor. LDAP
> was chosen because the documentation supported it AND I had used it
> elsewhere with success, you decided it wasn't necessary and you don't know
> my network or the facts, that is arrogant on your part. DCPromo wasn't used
> as it runs on Windows boxes, not the Ubuntu server I was using, again you
> assumed I'm an idiot and your ignorance is showing. You can't downgrade an
> SBS server to a legacy mode because of Exchange, conversions are one way and
> not reversible. Chapter 4 of the Samba manual discusses and clearly explains
> the use of LDAP and recommends it's use, so where you get your facts from is
> not clear to me, perhaps the manual is wrong. Since the LDAP configuration
> occurs in several other chapters I have to wonder why it would be documented
> if not supported, and since you have no first hand knowledge of my network,
> you have to be pretty arrogant to tell me when or where I need it. 

>     You accused me of not knowing my craft and you don't know the facts,
> but as you pointed out and I openly admitted I didn't know what I was doing.
> I read the documentation, and I made my best guess as to it's implementation
> and it didn't work and there were serious consequences. That YOU can't
> dispute, I have the proof in the failure, so you will have to accept them as
> I didn't imagine it. The damage occurred when I was attempting to configure
> and synchronize the Linux machine to my existing domain using webmin and the
> information I obtained from the Samba website, again these are the facts and
> you disputing them is calling me a liar. You keep saying I was building a
> domain controller, I never said that, I said I was attempting to configure
> LDAP and Kerberos to work with my existing domain controller, again you have
> no idea what I was doing, but your sure I am making it up. I was attempting
> to use the Single Sign On and use LDAP for the AD directory storage and
> synchronization, which is discussed in the manual. I am familiar with it and
> I have used it elsewhere. 

>     If I knew what I was doing wrong, then I obviously wouldn't have
> done it a second time to verify my results, which were the same, again facts
> you can't dispute, unless you want to keep calling me a liar. The existing
> Microsoft Domain controller stopped working and required a complete restore
> to function again, not to mention every workstation having to be reset.
> Whatever Winbind, LDAP and the Kerberos configurations I did (covered in the
> manual), the minute I synced that Linux server to my domain controller is
> stopped working, I was there and I have the Microsoft Trouble ticket for
> them to do a post mortem and tell me what had happened, so again you are
> being arrogant that you know everything and you know what I did wrong. The
> fact that I screwed it up is still the fact, you just keep calling me a liar
> when I explained what I did.

>     I am new to Linux so I started with the UBUNTU server manual reading
> up on Samba, and then I went to Samba.org to investigate something that was
> made to sound relatively simple, create a file server to share files on a
> windows network and use the single sign on capability in Samba. Did I
> understand everything I read, I thought so, and the documentation seemed
> reasonable and I followed it, and it contributed to a big problem. Why,
> probably because I used my Microsoft experience to understanding the Samba
> manual. Ok, so I screwed it up, you still don't have the right to call me a
> liar and tell me I don't know my job because I tried something new and
> attempted to expand my knowledge.

>     As for your tone, I don't appreciate you attacking me and accusing
> me of lying, when I clearly stated I was in error, it was my fault and that
> I obviously misunderstood the manual. You accused me of fabricating the
> facts, they are still true, I attempted to follow the manual relying on my
> experience and I was wrong, but the manual gave me information and lead me
> to those conclusions. You continue to attack my experience and you don't
> know me, you didn't have all the facts, but you spout off that you know
> everything and I'm a liar, that is just rude and arrogant.

>     I still stand that my explanation is the record of the facts, your
> assumptions are not based on you knowing what I did, where I went wrong and
> what my abilities are. They are your opinions being defended by your
> experience and nothing more.

>     You can have the last word and post your response, but I am done and
> I have nothing more to say.