Running Windows Server for the purposes of just AD is ridiculous IMO.
> I wanted to hang myself with just about every option except AD.
I've worked with (then) Novell eDir, OpenLDAP and a little with AD. I found OpenLDAP to be by far the nicest to use.
The moral of this story is: anecdotal evidence is anecdotal.
> Fortunately, I think we are in or near a post-LDAP world.
That's not a good thing.
I disagree. The pain of running Windows Server is outweighed by the excellence, stability, effortless scalability, and programmability of AD.
> I found OpenLDAP to be by far the nicest to use.
I've implemented all the same (and others such as Netscape/Sun Directory Server). I strongly disagree. Hell, I even come from a UNIX/C background.
> The moral of this story is: anecdotal evidence is anecdotal.
Pot. Kettle.
> That's not a good thing.
I guess we'll just have to agree to disagree across the board, then. Although I am well used to it now, I find LDAP programming is obtuse and thoroughly not a good setup for modern networks and APIs. There are much better, more naturally scalable ways to do things.
Lightweight Directory Access Protocol is anything but lightweight.
That was my point. You have one view I have another.
This is ridiculously simple with OpenLDAP. The only part that's 'missing' is a self-service web UI.