Truenas as domain controller - why not if others can?

[Cupax]

Hello.

I read a lot on this and other forums about why the domain controller service was removed from Truenas.
I just wonder why, not technically but why this decision from the developers?
How come Windows is selling AD + file server all-in-one for ages without problems, even a Synology NAS can be used as an AD server and file server in one box.
I think here Truenas is missing out a lot of users, especially in the small to medium businesses.
We are a team of 6 people, were looking to go Truenas for our server needs, but because of this limitation we are going to go Synology.

 

[sretalla]

I just wonder why, not technically but why this decision from the developers?

As I recall having seen it at the time, most (if not all) enterprise customers (the primary development focus of the product) have MS AD servers, so weren't using the functionality.

It was for some reasons difficult to maintain it, so it was dropped (due to lack of enterprise interest).

If you need it, run a small VM (on CORE) or App (on SCALE) to deliver the domain controller functionality needed.

 

[MrGuvernment]

AD should always be on its own system, whether a VM on a failover cluster, or a physical system. Sure windows can do it, you can also install AD, file service, office and Adobe photoshop on a Windows Server if you wanted, does not mean it is good practice.

Do you plan to have multiple Synologies to run fail over Domain Controllers? Cause if you were just planning on running 1...good luck with that if your Synology goes down.

And if you are only 6 people, why do you feel you need a Domain Controller?

 

[Cupax]

AD should always be on its own system, whether a VM on a failover cluster, or a physical system. Sure windows can do it, you can also install AD, file service, office and Adobe photoshop on a Windows Server if you wanted, does not mean it is good practice.

Do you plan to have multiple Synologies to run fail over Domain Controllers? Cause if you were just planning on running 1...good luck with that if your Synology goes down.

And if you are only 6 people, why do you feel you need a Domain Controller?

Because we use Windows PC and AD is a neat way to keep all the users in a single place and folders in order. We had a single Windows server running for 11 years with no trouble, but now we have to expand the drives and are thinking to replace the whole server.
And even if the Synology goes down, we would just take the external backup USB drive and temporarily work from there until the NAS gets fixed or replaced.
I'm just saying, many small teams like us just need a simple file serving NAS box. If it does AD, even better! That's why I think TrueNAS is missing out on this segment.

 

[MrGuvernment]

Sure, server can run fine for years, or it could die the very next day after you get everything set up.

For 6 users, would be more tempted to just create each user an account on the NAS and be done with it and if you want just use a security group and add the user(s) into said group for the access they need to which ever shares, once they save the connection on their computer they are done.

If the Synology goes down, have to hope your user creds are cached in windows or linux OS (if joined) to log into your domain account, and then when the Synology is back, hopefully you had a backup to reload the LDAP server part and your accounts still work, otherwise you are now redoing all of that and people get new accounts, which means a new profile in Windows (if using windows....)

Just thinking of the what if it does go down, what will be the headaches of it..will everyone want to remember what their local OS password was to get in and use that, and have to copy over their files from their domain profile et cetera?