Home domain
I’ve finally decided to set up a domain on my home network. I’m trying to decide if I should use Ubuntu Server or Windows Server 2003 (Standard Edition) as the domain controller. Currently, I have an Ubuntu server (6.06.1) running BIND9, DHCP, MySQL and Apache.
We use Windows 2000 & 2003 at work so I have more experience setting it up. I want to learn more about Linux administration, though, so that makes me lean toward Linux. There’s a write-up on HowtoForge about setting up a domain controller using Ubuntu 7.10 and Samba. I plan to follow that article if I go the Linux route.
Either OS will run fine on the system I have:
The current Ubuntu server installation isn’t using many resources. Webmin shows that it’s only using 192 MB of RAM (out of 2 GB) and 0 MB of swap. I know that Windows 2003 would use more than that just with a base OS install.
I think I’ll try to get Ubuntu working first. If I can’t get it to work, I’ll load Windows 2003. Either way, I will have Apache and MySQL running because I use Jinzora as my media server. I’ve tried running Jinzora on IIS but it didn’t run as well as it does on Apache.
A nation of sheep will beget a government of wolves. - Edward R. Morrow
29.Dec.07 
Linux, Networking, Windows
You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.
You definitely won’t find anything easier for the domain controller role than a Windows server. That’s one of the few things I REALLY like about Windows.
The main thing I’d suggest watching out for if that if you plan to add any additional domain controllers later, I’m not sure how that will work. It’s generally not a great idea to go with just one, but for home that’s probably not a big deal. That said, I’m not sure how easy it is to add a second Samba-based DC later to an existing Samba-based domain.
You can, however, generally mix and match Samba and Windows NT/2k/2k3 for DCs as long as you are in “mixed mode” and not “Windows 2000 native” or whatever it’s called. Most of my experience has been with Windows 2k and 2k3 (just recently playing with 2k8) so I’ve never had much luck with Samba although the next version will be Active Directory compatible.
The only other thing that would make me lean towards Windows for a home server is that with Samba you’ll miss out on Group Policy, one of the nicer Windows domain features. You *can* do the same things with Samba but instead of setting policies you are stuck using logon scripts that load those “.reg” registry patches at logon. As my daughter gets older, Group Policy should be pretty useful.
Incidentally, you may want to play with Windows Home Server when it comes out. It’s pretty much a standalone DC for home users based on Win2k8 “Server Core” (the one with no–or at least very little–GUI). It also functions as a router/Internet gateway/firewall/etc. Since it’s a home product I don’t have access to it beta versions on M$ TechNet, but I believe they are marketing it as both a hardware product and a software-only version. I’m not convinced there is much of a market for that sort of thing, but that might be up your alley.
If you do end up going with Linux but aren’t satisfied with Ubuntu, you might want to consider a RedHat derivative such as Fedora or CentOS. I’m not particularly taken with the RedHat family (although my web servers run CentOS), but with Ubuntu and other Debian derivatives Samba seems to be more of an afterthought.
One other thing–you know how I love to hijack your blog! hehe–if you want something super-simple that’s Linux-based, you might want to try OpenFiler. It can join a domain but I think it can also act as a Samba DC. It’s primarily a file server appliance OS but I seem to recall it letting you create domain accounts through its web interface.
I’d suggest my old standby, OpenBSD. The reason is because by default there’s no GUI, so it’s less overhead, and for a server thats a good thing. It’s pure command line (and you can use SSH for admin’ing the box from anywhere), and I had a domain controller set up in my house with it. I had BIND9, lighttpd, and mySQL running, using less than 64MB of RAM for the total usage!
The only bad thing about it is that BIND can suck trying to write the domain files correctly, but it shouldn’t be too much of a problem.
But like Rollie said, Windows Server is really nice because they make it easy to manage all the services, it’s a piece of cake to add a new A record or CNAME to the DNS server. So basically it’s a tradeoff between ease-of-use (Windows) or performance (Linux/BSD).
I’d try both and get a feel for which one suits you and the situation the best.
I set up the server a couple of hours ago using Ubuntu 7.10 (Server). It’s headless with no GUI. I use SSH for admining it remotely. So far, so good but I haven’t finished “tweaking” it yet. Give me a couple of more hours and it will probably be crashed.
This will be the only domain controller at my house. I don’t have enough systems to really need another one. Maybe one day I will once the kids get computers. That’s why I’m trying out the Linux server now. If all else fails, I’ll load Windows Server (whatever version is out at the time) and they’ll just use Windows clients.
Windows Server is extremely easy to use. All of the servers I set up at work run Windows 2k3. I’m just testing out a Linux DC for the experience. Windows Home Server is a possibility if they get all the kinks worked out. That will probably be after the first service pack.
Rollie - you know how I love to hijack your blog
Yeah. I hate it when you add helpful content to my post.