> Getting it working with Kerberos or anything else to make it a reasonable alternative to AD is 100 miles of duct tape and random LDIFs.
That's nonsense. OpenLDAP has had seamless integration with Heimdal Kerberos for literally decades. And the support for running a KDC on top of LDAP was written by OpenLDAP contributors (Luke Howard and myself).
https://github.com/heimdal/heimdal/blob/master/lib/hdb/hdb-l...
as an aside, I also wrote the support for using the KDC on top of LMDB https://github.com/heimdal/heimdal/blob/master/lib/hdb/hdb-m...
As for duct tape and random LDIFs - again, Symas Corp and the OpenLDAP Project were the only guys funding efforts to standardize this integration.
http://kerberos.996246.n3.nabble.com/Ietf-krb-wg-LDAP-schema...
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-chu-ldap-kdc-schema/
The fact that Kerberos works well on top of LDAP today is because the OpenLDAP Project laid the groundwork for that to happen.
> Yes, you can argue that Red Hat/SuSE should/could have simply contributed to OpenLDAP, but it hasn't seen a major release in a decade, and there was an incredible amount of friction in trying to contribute anything large.
RedHat has never tried to contribute anything large to OpenLDAP. And large contributions aren't a problem. We have entirely new DB backends still being contributed by 3rd parties. E.g. the WiredTiger backend http://www.openldap.org/devel/gitweb.cgi?p=openldap.git;a=tr...