On Mon, 26 Mar 2000, Le Van Truong wrote:

|How can I add the 'pap' to options file make the pppd work ? because I
|mean my ISP is required to used 'pap' for connection.( I already printed
|out the pppd howto and the pppd.8 man page to read those but I still have
|problem) when I add "+pap" command line in options file and try pppd, I
|get the messages out :  "The remote system is required to authenticate
|itself but I couldn't find any suitable secrets (password) for it to use
|to do so." and the pppd is not do any thing.

The +pap option means that the peer is required to authenticate itself to
pppd, very few (if any) ISPs will do that.  In order for you to
authenticate to the ISP the connection must progress to the IPCP link
negotiation stage, and you must have configured the pppd user option and
the pap-secrets file.

|Mar 27 10:05:44 spider chat[824]: expect (CONNECT)
|Mar 27 10:05:44 spider chat[824]: ^M
|Mar 27 10:06:12 spider chat[824]: ^M
|Mar 27 10:06:12 spider chat[824]: CONNECT
|Mar 27 10:06:12 spider chat[824]:  -- got it 
|Mar 27 10:06:12 spider chat[824]: send (^M)
|Mar 27 10:06:12 spider chat[824]: expect (dc)

This is the problem this time and produces the same symptoms as the first
post.  The chat script is not correct and chat expects `dc' which, I
suspect, was \d\c orginally and should be sent with the expect-send CONNECT
\d\c.  Unfortunately it looks like you didn't remove the '' after the
original CONNECT but instead added \d\c after it. Chat script expect/sends
come in pairs, the `expect' string followed by the `send' string.  Read
"man chat."

|Mar 27 10:10:08 spider chat[855]: expect (CONNECT)
|Mar 27 10:10:08 spider chat[855]: ^M
|Mar 27 10:10:36 spider chat[855]: ^M
|Mar 27 10:10:36 spider chat[855]: CONNECT
|Mar 27 10:10:36 spider chat[855]:  -- got it 
|Mar 27 10:10:36 spider chat[855]: send (\d)
|Mar 27 10:10:37 spider chat[855]: expect (ogin:)

This is the same problem as in the first post.

---
Clifford Kite                                               Not a guru. (tm)
[EMAIL PROTECTED]                                           Not even close.

Reply via email to