Samba yes, but is it Samba4 ???
For sure Fedora is not going to invent yet another SMB emulation
Problem is that Samba wording is quite confusing:
- Samba as smbd server: this work with Samba 3 since years
- Samba as DC emulator: this implements, e.g. Kerberos. Which one should Fedora keep? MIT or Heimdall ??? Both can’t run in parallel
Same for accounts directory.
What is painful is not SMB/CIFS (although IMHO, SMB is far for being the perfect file access protocol) but account management, request from customers to manage Windows workstations and accounts in the “Microsoft like” way, meaning with Microsoft tools and consol, GPOs etc…
Current open source answer is Samba4. Too bad, it shares the same name.
Therefore, when I say "FreeIPA and Samba4 share conflict of interest, you tell me:
“look at, FreeIPA uses Samba too”…
Problem you currently face, as far as I understand, is not “Samba” but “Samba as DC”, AKA Samba4
Well, I’ll stop here, I definitely don’t know enough of NethServer to have any clever additional comment. Perhaps later…