For some reason, emails to Cap’n Dave Kearns have been bouncing back to me as undeliverable. Since Dave sometimes reads this blog, I post is my brief response to his recent newsletter entry “Why Novell Virtual Directory Services is a good idea,” for which I could not find a an online link yet, so I posted the text further below. [Update 24Aug05: I added direct link to Dave’s article now that it is online.]
The funny thing about most Virtual Directory vendors is that they claim to not use another store. Most do. When you dig into RadiantLogic, for example, it uses a relational database underneath (at least, it did back when I was over NVDS, then still codenamed “Kepler”).
However, There are still plenty of valid arguments against NVDS legitimately being a “virtual directory”–virtual directories are generally understood to have a very different use and functionality from what NVDS does. But for me, the data store argument is probably not the best angle on this, since the VD (egad, is that really the abbreviation?) vendors mostly just obfuscate the fact that they do in fact use a data store.
Filed under: Novell |