Linux-Networking Digest #720, Volume #9 Wed, 30 Dec 98 22:13:45 EST
Contents:
Re: Q: NE2000 or not on Linux? (Stephen Carville)
Re: PLEASE HELP !!! PLEASE HELP !!! (Darren Greer)
Filesystem Woes ("Roger A. Prata")
How can I install a Linux bridge/gateway ? ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: AOL as ISP? (zentara)
Re: Problem setting up homenetwork with 3c509b. ("E.M. Janssen")
Re: AOL as ISP? ("Bob Crandell")
Re: masquerading/forwarding - routing problem? ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: Want to do direct install of Redhat 5.2 via FTP since I have Cox@home but am
stuck in the DUNGEONS OF DOOM !!! SO HEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEELP !!! ("Karl W.
Gaston")
Re: using proxy ("Prutser")
Re: PPP/CCP problem (Andrew Sun)
ftponly (Jeff Bishop)
Re: Q: NE2000 or not on Linux? (Lee Reynolds)
Re: PPP/CCP problem ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Gateway Woes (Rob Wiltbank)
Re: PPP/CCP problem (James Carlson)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Wed, 30 Dec 1998 17:05:26 -0800
From: Stephen Carville <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Q: NE2000 or not on Linux?
danpel wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I'am going to run an ISDN 64kBit connection out of my personal Linux box
> but I'm vey much in doubt on which network card to buy.
>
> First of all it should be PCMCIA.
>
> But should it be NE2000 or not? I've seen some d-link card which are
> pretty inexpensive, but I have been told that they are NE2000-cards and
> therefore have no DMA, and should be polled regularly.
>
> Will this have any effect on my Linux performance?
>
> What I'm looking for I guess is someone who could say: "I've
> successfully run Linux with a XXX PCMCIA Ethernet card which is also
> cheap" :-)
I'm using an NE2000 PCMCIA card in my laptop (HP Imnobook 5000) and it
works quite well. You do have to be careful because some so called NE2000
clones are not quite as good as they should be. Make certain your vendor
has a retrun policy you can live with -- JIC.
--
Stephen Carville
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Civilization, as we know it today, owes it's existence to the engineers.
These are the men who, down the long centuries, have learned to exploit the
properties of matter and the sources of power for the benefit of mankind.
L. Sprague DeCamp
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Darren Greer)
Crossposted-To:
linux.redhat.install,comp.os.linux.questions,comp.os.linux.hardware,comp.os.linux.setup
Subject: Re: PLEASE HELP !!! PLEASE HELP !!!
Date: Thu, 31 Dec 1998 01:06:02 GMT
Post all you want....but please....not so many caps...its quite
annoying, and will probably prevent many to even consider responding.
DrGreer
On Thu, 31 Dec 1998 00:37:41 GMT, Drg ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
-->SORRY, DOUGY BOY BUT I AIN'T GONNA PAY. Besides, I still have to make
-->sure my ethernet card works. As for posting, I CAN POST ALL I WANT
-->UNTIL I FIND A DECENT SOLUTION !!!
-->
-->On Wed, 30 Dec 1998 18:05:51 -0500, Doug Bryant
--><[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
-->
-->>>>install via ftp with cox@home and if so, how and what configurations
-->>>>are to be made during installation?
-->>Yes but do not know how.
-->>
-->>
-->>http://www.cheapbytes.com << $1.99 Redhat 5.2 as well as many other Linux
-->>and Frebsd partitions
-->>Don't Post to so many newsgroups again
-->>
-->>"[EMAIL PROTECTED]" wrote:
-->>
-->>> Hi. i do apologize if my message sounds a bit too long but at least
-->>> you all will be able to figure out the sticky problem I'm stuck with
-->>> and may even know how to help me out of it. I currently am running
-->>> Windows 98 on one hard disk. However, since it is 7.5 GB and it's
-->>> 32-bit, Linux won't recognize it when I first install Linux. At least
-->>> that's what I have been told and eventually found out. Besides, sure I
-->>> can download 500 MB in 2 hrs without any trouble via my cable modem,
-->>> but I would still need to copy it to a CD-R or CD-RW disc or something
-->>> and I'm not gonna pay $200 - $400 for CD-R/RW (in case you all wanted
-->>> to know why I would not prefer to copy to a storage device and then
-->>> install). I'm not sure if Linux will do it off my zip disks if I copy
-->>> linux to 6 zip discs. In any case, these wonderful people keep on
-->>> changing the versions of RH Linux. Therefore having got fed up with
-->>> it, I looked in the book which talked about RH Linux and how to
-->>> install. Well, I had versions 3 and 4 of RH but since some of my
-->>> crucial hardware at that time could not be recognized I abandoned RH
-->>> until I finally found out that if I had a direct connection with
-->>> Cox@home just like corporations and universities that have a direct
-->>> connection with their T1, T3, OC-3, etc... server, then you don't even
-->>> have to download RH linux. All you really have to download are the
-->>> boot.img and supp.img files and transfer them to two blank but
-->>> formatted 3.5" high density disks. So I did just that and booted up my
-->>> machine and when I got to the installation method option, I chose ftp
-->>> method. When I got to the ethernet card question, I 3c509 driver. By
-->>> the way, I still have the 3c509b PnP 16-bit Ethernet adaptor which I
-->>> obtained when I used to attend another university. Rather than sell
-->>> it, I kept it for something like a cable modem. In fact that same
-->>> ethernet card I had was part of the requirements for my cable modem
-->>> installation. Anyway, RH Linux never in the past had any trouble
-->>> recognizing my ethernet card. The only trouble was recognizing my
-->>> video cards,my parallel port zip drive, and my higher capacity hard
-->>> drive. here, in 5.2 that was not the problem. however, when I got to
-->>> the options of DHCP, BOOTP, and Static Address, I chose the Static
-->>> option and filled in my fields correctly. However, I got an error
-->>> message saying unable to connect to host. I fully verified the ftp
-->>> site address and typed it correctly. So I then went back and tried the
-->>> other two options only to get the "no response" error message from
-->>> bootp and dhcp. So the question still remains, isn't it possible to
-->>> install via ftp with cox@home and if so, how and what configurations
-->>> are to be made during installation?
-->>>
-->>> P.S:
-->>> PLEASE DO NO TELL ME TO USE ANOTHER VERSION OF UNIX SINCE I KINDA AM
-->>> USED TO RH LINUX. ALSO, PLEASE DO NOT TELL ME HOW TO PARTITION MY HARD
-->>> DRIVE SINCE MY 75. GB HARD DRIVE IS NEARLY FILLED UP. I PLAN TO
-->>> INSTALL REDHAT LINUX 5.2 TO MY OLDER 730 MB HARD DRIVE SO PLEASE DO
-->>> NOT BRING IN 7.5 GB INTO THE PICTURE UNLESS YOU ARE GONNA GIVE ME A
-->>> FREE CD-RW DRIVE FIRST !!! ALL I AM ASKING IS THAT YOU GIVE ME A
-->>> SOLUTION FOR THE PROBLEM I GOT. DO NOT GIVE ME IRRELEVANT BULLSH**
-->>> SUCH AS TELLING ME TO PARTITION MY OTHER HARD DRIVE. I WILL CONTINUE
-->>> TO POST THIS MESSAGE UNTIL SOMEONE HELPS ME FIX THIS PROBLEM !!!
-->>>
-->>> Please post a reply to this message. I've had to switch ISPs in the
-->>> past due to people spamming and framing my acount(s).
-->>>
-->>> --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-->>
-->
------------------------------
From: "Roger A. Prata" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Filesystem Woes
Date: Wed, 30 Dec 1998 16:25:04 -0500
Hello all.. I wanted to thank everyone for the assistance with my networking
problem. I have (thanks to all your help) solved the problem and gotten my
TCP/IP network up. I do have one other problem, and one call for
comments... firstly, when I upgraded to a 2.0.34 kernel, I lost msdos and
ISO9660 (CD-ROM) filesystem support. I swear they are compiled in, but I
cannot mount either of them.
Secondly, is anyone out there using Prodigy Internet with Linux? If so, are
you using scripts, minicom, or how are you connecting? A typical ISP would
not be a problem for me, with minicom and pppd, but I cannot get Prodigy to
work... anyone out there using it? Thanks in advance for all the help..
-Roger
P.S. If possible, please CC any answers to my e-mail box [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Thanks!
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: How can I install a Linux bridge/gateway ?
Date: Wed, 30 Dec 1998 20:08:06 GMT
I have two NT networks (domains): 192.168.10.x and 192.168.20.x .
I need to communicate between the two networks, and I think to
use a Linux PC to do this (now its used for Internet proxy).
I've configured a new device (eth0 is default to 192.168.10.2):
ifconfig eth0:1 192.168.20.2 up
then I've add two routes:
route add -net 192.168.10.0 netmask 255.255.255.0 eth0
route add -net 192.168.20.0 netmask 255.255.255.0 eth0:1
then I've configured the two NT Server machines to look
at Linux pc as gateway.
But this don't work. Why ??
How can I solve my problem ?
Thanks
Andrea <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (zentara)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.misc
Subject: Re: AOL as ISP?
Reply-To: ""
Date: Wed, 30 Dec 1998 22:06:46 GMT
On Tue, 29 Dec 1998 16:43:40 -0500, Troutman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>In the past, using AOL 3, I have connected to AOL then minimized and run
>Eudora and Netscape to surf the net. That would tell me that they are
>using tcp/ip and it may be possible to run Linux on a home lan behind a
>proxy on the PC running AOL.
>
>Why on earth you would _want_ to do that is beyond me.
Maybe to use those 100 free hours they hand out. :-)
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 31 Dec 1998 02:37:53 +0100
From: "E.M. Janssen" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Problem setting up homenetwork with 3c509b.
Hello Robert and everybody else who's interested in this sleepless nights
creating problem grrrr#!!#### (sorry about that)
I have downloaded the program 3c509x.exe to see if it helped.
But I have not been able to use it yet because when I start the
troubleshooting or configuration part.
It sais something like "configuring adapter please wait". I waited for 10
minutes and nothing happened.
The computer did not do anything anymore (hanged is the english word I
guess).
I tried all the options but nothing seems to work.
I started the program in the save msdos modus from win95 is this the correct
way?
After a few hours a gave up and deceided stop with the two 3c509b's. So I
started fresh with
the other network card I bought the 3com589d for my laptop.
Slackware 3.5 had no problem again with detecting it and every thing looked
fine again.
I configured all the files and the light on the hub came on as it is supposed
to.
When I tried to Ping itself (not localhost but it's own IP number) it looked
good on the screen.
But the light on the hub was not flikkering. When I tried to ping the hosts
with 3c509b's this what I see :
PING odin.myexample.com (192.168.1.2): 56 data bytes
--- odin.myexample.com ping statistics ---
6 packets transmitted, 0 packets received, 100% packet loss
So I guess same thing as my previous posting.
Does anybody have suggestions?
And how do I start 3c509x.exe in a correct way?
Furthermore I would like to thank everybody for all the emails (about 20 ) I
have got with.
I hope this problem is solved quickly because a lot of people are having
trouble with it.
Now let's try to get some sleep.
Martijn Janssen
Netherlands
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> >> The computers are unable to PING each other.
>
> I had a similar problem using the 3c509(B). I had everything configured,
> but pinging didn't work. The problem was that the 3c509 has different
> transceivers (AUI, 10base2, 10baseT). By default, the 10baseT transceiver
> was enabled; you'll probably need the 10base2 (coax) type. I had to use
> the program `3c509x.exe' (available from ftp.3com.com) to firstly disable
> PnP and secondly reset the default.
>
> You might also like to have a look at:
> http://cesdis.gsfc.nasa.gov/linux/drivers/3c509.html
>
> Good luck, Robert
>
> --
> Robert Vollmert [EMAIL PROTECTED]
------------------------------
From: "Bob Crandell" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: AOL as ISP?
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.misc
Date: 30 Dec 1998 18:02:12 -0800
I called them to see if I could setup a little office using them as an ISP
and using WinProxy as the dialer. They said NO. No way. Not possible.
Forget it. Ain't gonna happen. I changed the office to CompuServe.
zentara <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in article
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>...
> On Tue, 29 Dec 1998 16:43:40 -0500, Troutman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote:
> >In the past, using AOL 3, I have connected to AOL then minimized and run
> >Eudora and Netscape to surf the net. That would tell me that they are
> >using tcp/ip and it may be possible to run Linux on a home lan behind a
> >proxy on the PC running AOL.
> >
> >Why on earth you would _want_ to do that is beyond me.
>
> Maybe to use those 100 free hours they hand out. :-)
>
>
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: masquerading/forwarding - routing problem?
Date: Wed, 30 Dec 1998 21:57:29 GMT
Make sure IP forwarding is on:
echo "1" > /proc/sys/net/ipv4/ip_forward (for slackware)
also make sure that each Workstation has 192.168.1.1 defined as the gateway.
-Brian
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
David Khait <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hi!
>
> I'm setting up IP Masquerading and I'm almost done. My linux box can
> talk both to the LAN and to the Internet. However, packets from LAN
> machines never go outside for some reason. Is this a routing problem?
>
> Here are some configuration details for my Linux box:
>
> eth0 connected to cable modem (on outside ip addr - 24.3.42.203)
> eth1 connected to local lan (192.168.1.1)
>
> routes summary:
> Destination Mask Dev
> 192.168.1.0 255.255.255.0 eth1
> 24.3.42.0 255.255.255.0 eth0
> and loopback, etc.
>
> ipfwadm -F -l returns:
> IP firewall forward rules, default policy: deny
> type prot source destination ports
> acc/m all 192.168.1.0/24 anywhere n/a
>
> tcpdump -i eth1 shows packets arriving and dns translation being
> performed for i.e. ftp requests from my client. However, tcpdump -i
> eth0 shows no activity beyond normal requests by ISP's gateway.
>
> Any help is greatly appreciated, even if you can suggest another way to
> debug this problem.
>
> Thanks a lot!
>
> Boris
>
============= Posted via Deja News, The Discussion Network ============
http://www.dejanews.com/ Search, Read, Discuss, or Start Your Own
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 30 Dec 1998 17:38:14 -0500
From: "Karl W. Gaston" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
linux.redhat.install,comp.os.linux.questions,comp.os.linux.hardware,comp.os.linux.setup
Subject: Re: Want to do direct install of Redhat 5.2 via FTP since I have Cox@home but
am stuck in the DUNGEONS OF DOOM !!! SO HEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEELP !!!
If you could read anything other than upper case letters, there was a solution for you
to do this for free, with your piece of sh*t hardware. But since you probably only
read
the first two lines of my post before your attention deficit problem kicked in you
probably missed it.
>From my original post:
>Or you can DOS format a small partition on the 700M drive,
>enough to hold the Linux distribution, copy all of the distribution to it (via your
>internet connection), then use the boot disks to fdisk, format and install the
>unallocated space of the 700M drive under Linux (like using the DOS as a bootstrap,
>instead of purchasing a CD, or Jaz, or CD RW).
As I have done this before with Slackware Linux I know it works, no expensive hardware
or stuff needed. The time that you have spent wasting while whining, you could have
figured it out by now.
Have a nice day a$$*ole
THE DUNGEONS OF DOOOOOOOOOOM wrote:
> HEY MAN !!! I AIN'T PAYING SH** FOR LINUX !!! AND I WILL CONTINUE
> POSTING FOR HELP UNTIL IT'S DONE !!! SO EITHER YOU HELP OR GET LOST
> AND STUFF A PIE IN YOUR FACE, FARTFACE !!!
>
> On Wed, 30 Dec 1998 15:42:02 -0500, "Karl W. Gaston"
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> >Dear Whateveryournameis,
> >
> >I can't imagine why someone would pick you to slam with e-mails.
> >
> >You might have wanted to include the following information in your previous note.
> >If it was there I didn't see it due to the lack of white space (some people call em
> >paragraphs), plus the whining in UPPER case was a nice touch.
> >
> >Do you want access to the Win98 32 bit partition from Linux?
> >Or are you planning on just running Linux on the 700M drive?
> >
> >Since your note says you are familiar with RH Linux, spend $50-60 and get a CD from
> >RH, then you will have no need to download, ftp, or backup any of your stuff, just
> >format the drive and go. Or you can DOS format a partition on the 700M drive,
> >enough to hold the Linux distribution, copy all of the distribution to it (via your
> >internet connection), then use the boot disks to fdisk, format and install the
> >unallocated space of the 700M drive under Linux (like using the DOS as a bootstrap,
> >instead of purchasing a CD, or Jaz, or CD RW).
> >
> >Good luck & stop whining
> >
> >[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >
------------------------------
From: "Prutser" <twinkelapestaartjegeocities.com>
Subject: Re: using proxy
Date: Wed, 30 Dec 1998 12:51:07 +0100
>Maybe my question was unclear. I am trying to reach the internet using my
>linux box, and then go through a win95 box connected to the internet.
I did not have any problems with http browsing. Just set your proxy to the
ip of your gateway and have your gateway (on the win machine) accept your
linux ip.
------------------------------
From: Andrew Sun <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.protocols.ppp
Subject: Re: PPP/CCP problem
Date: Thu, 31 Dec 1998 01:55:03 GMT
Marc Simont wrote:
>
> There is no "noccp" option in ppp version 2.2.0
>
> That (or its equivalent) is what Ive been looking
> for for the last 2 days!
>
The closest option is -bsdcomp.
That's all I can find after looking quickly at the ppp-2.2 code.
If this doesn't do, then you might
consider upgrading to ppp-2.3.5.
--
Sun, Andrew, "Using & Managing PPP," O'Reilly & Associates, March 1999
http://www.oreilly.com/catalog/umppp
------------------------------
From: Jeff Bishop <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: ftponly
Date: Wed, 30 Dec 1998 20:14:54 -0600
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
==============47A96EEC5AEEFF808A7E7C4E
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; x-mac-type="54455854";
x-mac-creator="4D4F5353"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
I want to set up ftp accounts only. The ftpd man page says that the
user must have a standard shell returned by getusershell. How do I get
around this. I don't want any shell activity going on. If I eliminate
a shell reference in /etc/passwd, I get a ftp login error.
Running RedHat 5.2.
--
Jeff Bishop
Advanced Data Analysis and Preservation Technology, Inc.
==============47A96EEC5AEEFF808A7E7C4E
Content-Type: text/x-vcard; charset=us-ascii;
name="jbish.vcf"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Description: Card for Jeff Bishop
Content-Disposition: attachment;
filename="jbish.vcf"
begin:vcard
n:Bishop;Jeff
tel;fax:972-243-6740
tel;work:972-406-1444
x-mozilla-html:FALSE
org:Advanced Data Analysis and Preservation Technology, Inc.;ITS
adr:;;P.O. Box 7849;Dallas;TX;75209;USA
version:2.1
email;internet:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
title:Director - Information Services
x-mozilla-cpt:;1
fn:Jeff Bishop
end:vcard
==============47A96EEC5AEEFF808A7E7C4E==
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 31 Dec 1998 07:52:24 -0700
From: Lee Reynolds <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Q: NE2000 or not on Linux?
danpel wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I'am going to run an ISDN 64kBit connection out of my personal Linux box
> but I'm vey much in doubt on which network card to buy.
>
> First of all it should be PCMCIA.
>
> But should it be NE2000 or not? I've seen some d-link card which are
> pretty inexpensive, but I have been told that they are NE2000-cards and
> therefore have no DMA, and should be polled regularly.
>
> Will this have any effect on my Linux performance?
>
> What I'm looking for I guess is someone who could say: "I've
> successfully run Linux with a XXX PCMCIA Ethernet card which is also
> cheap" :-)
>
> Anyone for that?
I'm assuming that you've got a laptop since pcmcia is uncommon in desktop
systems, although it is possible to get an adapter to add pcmcia to one.
The thing to know about ne2000 clones is that they
are not all made alike. Some will work just fine with linux while others
will not work at all. It all has
to do with how closely they imitate a real NE2000. I don't know that the
cost of the card has anything
to do with this either. We have an NE 2000 clone in our server which cost
nine bucks. All I can tell you
is to be careful what you buy and hold on to the receipt so you can return
it. If you do have a desktop system, look for a card for which there are
specific drivers made for it, such as 3com and smc cards. If you can't
afford one of those and have to go with a clone you have a better chance
with an ISA card than with PCI. Look for one with jumpers on it so that
you can configure it yourself.
I haven't noticed any performance problems with the ne2000 clone we are
using and its running on the server doing IP masq.
Lee Reynolds
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Crossposted-To: comp.protocols.ppp
Subject: Re: PPP/CCP problem
Date: Wed, 30 Dec 1998 23:21:43 +0100
In comp.os.linux.networking Marc Simont <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Both systems then try to negotiate a Compression Control Protocol (CCP) and
> fail.
Try disabling CCP-negotiation (`noccp' in options-file).
--
Robert Vollmert [EMAIL PROTECTED]
------------------------------
From: Rob Wiltbank <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Gateway Woes
Date: Thu, 31 Dec 1998 02:13:12 +0000
Greetingsm folks.. Here's the situation:
I have a linux PC setup as a gateway, on the internal network, I have a
Windows95 PC correctly configured, so I think my problems might be on
the linux side.
Once I try to use the gateway from the Win95 PC for an outside
connection, it's sits there trying to find the address.
Any thoughts?
Rob
------------------------------
From: James Carlson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.protocols.ppp
Subject: Re: PPP/CCP problem
Date: 30 Dec 1998 17:36:43 -0500
Marc Simont <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> The modem works (minicom)
> My ISP doesnt use PAP/CHAP� (runs Apache on Solaris)
I don't think so. Apache is a web server, not a PPP implementation.
> Both systems then try to negotiate a Compression Control Protocol (CCP) and
> fail.
This is normal.
> I THINK that both sides are trying to initiate CCP at the same time,
> but I can find very little documentation on CCP.
RFC 1962 and my book are it. ;-}
> Note also:
> a) My system seems to be sending a CCP ConfReq with no databytes.
> Is this consistent with RFC 1962, Sec. 4.2?. Shouldn't there be at least
> 2 bytes of data?
Your system is being silly. It's saying "I know CCP, but I don't know
any compression algorithms." There's no reason to do that. May as
well disable CCP and LCP Protocol-Reject it instead.
Yes, the message is strictly standards conforming. (Note that pppd
does not give you exactly the data bytes you would be used to seeing
in RFC 1962. It trims the headers.)
> b) My system goes through a TermReq/TermAck sequence, and THEN sends out
> another ConfReq.
> I don't think the right hand knows what the left is doing.
Your system is wrong. Terminate-Request should NEVER be used to shut
down a protocol that is not converging. That does not work, and has
never worked.
> (I've tried running pppd with "-ac", "passive/silent" and "-bsdcomp" options --
> no change.
"-ac" has to do with header compression. That's completely unrelated
to CCP. Don't do that.
You need a "noccp" or "-ccp" option. That's not in the old versions
of pppd, but 2.3.5 does have it.
> ********************************
> Dec 23 17:48:20 bach pppd[3341]: rcvd [CCP ConfReq id=0x1 < 11 05 00 01 04>]
> Dec 23 17:48:20 bach pppd[3341]: sent [CCP ConfReq id=0x1]
> ********************************
That's fine. The other side is saying that it knows about STAC, and
your side says it knows nothing.
> Dec 23 17:48:20 bach pppd[3341]: sent [CCP ConfRej id=0x1 < 11 05 00 01 04>]
You tell the peer you don't know STAC -- pppd doesn't (and will never)
have this.
> Dec 23 17:48:20 bach pppd[3341]: rcvd [CCP ConfReq id=0x2 < 11 05 00 01 03>]
The peer is completely broken. It is illegal by RFC 1661 to request
an option after the peer has Configure-Rejected it.
Apparently the implementor of that other version thought that
Configure-Reject was similar to Configure-Nak in this case. It is
not.
> Dec 23 17:48:20 bach pppd[3341]: rcvd [CCP ConfReq id=0x4 < 12 06 00 00 00 01>]
> Dec 23 17:48:20 bach pppd[3341]: sent [CCP ConfRej id=0x4 < 12 06 00 00 00 01>]
The peer tries again (correctly this time) with MS-PPC. You don't
know that one either, so you biff it.
> Dec 23 17:48:23 bach pppd[3341]: sent [CCP ConfReq id=0x1]
He bogusly asks for no compression algorithm.
> Dec 23 17:48:24 bach pppd[3341]: rcvd [CCP TermReq id=0x6]
> Dec 23 17:48:24 bach pppd[3341]: sent [CCP TermAck id=0x6]
You improperly attempt to shut down CCP. (You should be sending
*either* CCP Configure-Ack *or* LCP Protocol-Reject at this point;
both would have the same effect.)
> The last three lines are repeated about 4 or 5 more times, about 3 seconds
> apart, then CCP times out and hangs until I hit ctl-C, whereupon everything
> shuts down (cleanly).
It shouldn't hang, even with CCP in trouble. You don't need to have
compression to run PPP.
It sure looks like dueling implementation bugs to me. I heard banjos
as I read the traces. ;-}
--
James Carlson, Consulting S/W Engineer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
IronBridge Networks / 55 Hayden Avenue 71.246W Vox: +1 781 372 8132
Lexington MA 02421-7996 / USA 42.423N Fax: +1 781 372 8090
"PPP Design and Debugging" --- http://people.ne.mediaone.net/carlson/ppp
------------------------------
** FOR YOUR REFERENCE **
The service address, to which questions about the list itself and requests
to be added to or deleted from it should be directed, is:
Internet: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
You can send mail to the entire list (and comp.os.linux.networking) via:
Internet: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Linux may be obtained via one of these FTP sites:
ftp.funet.fi pub/Linux
tsx-11.mit.edu pub/linux
sunsite.unc.edu pub/Linux
End of Linux-Networking Digest
******************************
