what's the overhead for having 1 share per person?
"Nail, Larry" wrote:
You can map the share anyway you'd like. The preferred & taught method is to create 1 single share and then let the OS create subdirectories on that share. All our PC home directories are individual shares. 1 reason is that we control all access at the share level if at all possible... don't have to mess with file level ACL's. This also relieves most of the issues of Unix file permisssions vs. NTFS permissions.
-----Original Message----- From: Tim Longo [mailto:tlongo@avaya.com] Sent: Wednesday, March 28, 2001 2:25 PM To: toasters@mathworks.com Subject: W2k profile and Netapp
Greetings:
Currently on my NT 4 domain, we map a user share on the netapp,(also the unix home), to a drive letter in the NT account profile. This is in the form of: Z: \toaster\share
We have noticed that with Windows 2000, they want this share to be mapped in the form of: Z: \toaster\share\folder
This makes migrating people from the old convention to the new convention quite a bit of work.
Has anyone else encountered this, and how do you work around this problem? Needless to say, we are extremely angry with Microsoft.
Thanks