SFU (Services For Unix) 3.5 on Win2k3

[Andreh]

Hi all,

I am looking for your feedback to qualify if the following is possible. I have found there to be a bit of a lack of information on the internet related to this, hence this posting.

I am working on a solution that will be a new based upon a Windows 2003 domain. We would like it to communicate with Sun Solaris 2.5 environment. I am looking to qualify if SFU 3.5 for Windows will allow this to happen. The reason for this need to maintain the old environment is to avoid upgrading some UNIX-based applications that are extremely expensive.

Ideally, I would like to know that this is NOT possible as the version of SUN OS is no longer supported by SUN as I expect if it does, there is likely to be a bit of pain.

Thanks for your help in advanced.


"Assumption is the mother of all f#%kups!

 

[xmsre]

Possible and practical are two very different things. It's probably possible depending on what exactly "communicate" means. In practical terms, the solution would be unsupportable in that SUN no longer supports the eunuchs side of the equation. You need to do a risk analysis and present this to your stakeholders. If this is a mission critical application, it won't fly.


f#%kups or frskups?

 

[Andreh]

Good point xmsre,

You seem to be on the same wavelength I am. Our customer has recently changed the scope on us. We had said that this old SUN environment was out of scope mainly due to vendor end of life. This I think is reasonable. In keeping with the "Customer is always right" philosophy, they would like to re-include it again.

In terms of communicate; the client has a parallel SUN environment that they would like to administrate from the windows side of things. There is also talk of single sign on which I don't believe is possible. This is pretty complicated even with recent versions of Solaris.

In defence of the customer (to hear their side), the applications that they are not wanting to upgrade are going at about $100 000 / user. This product is related to 3D rendering in 'defence' type of products. They are going to need to address this issue at some stage, the longer they leave it, the more likely they will have other issues.

We basically think it is a huge risk and not possible. We are aiming to justify why we won't support this in more technical certainty.


"Assumption is the mother of all f#%kups!