> > > I like to add that a lot of (Belgium) ISP are using CHAP, or even
worse
> > > MS-CHAP (Again one of the changed standards I was talking about in a
> > > previous mail)
> > Oh, never heard of it.
>
> Get pppd code and read the file MSCHAP80.
Wouldn't know where.
> > Just don't send a Auth Protocol Request option with PAP in your
> > Configure_Request packets (in fact don't send any kind of Auth Protocol
> > Request packets) and all will work fine.
>
> Send a PAP auth request. If they deny it, shutdown the line. :)
NO! Servers supporting it will also deny it. Instead, reply (as said) with a
NAK to the PPP Configuration_Request. And in fact this is correct. If an
authentication protocol should be used is pretty much the choice of the ISP.
So if no Auth_Prot_Req is sent, no authorization is required at all, and if
it is, you can incidate the desired protocol over the standard one.
If you don't do it this way, no wonder most servers don't seem to support
PAP. You must avoid 'double' options residing in as well the sending
Conf_Requests as the receiving Conf_Requests if possible.
> > True. But implementation is (at least in Assembly) too complex to be
worth
> > the effort
>
> Hehehehehe... C is cool... :)
Assembly is fast.
And although more difficult concerning complex tasks, still very much fun.
And it gives you complete control over the machine's actions and the
optimization of the code...
> > (searching for the "Username:"-string, and a good implementation
> > also requires the handling of scripts since the authentication is not
> > standarized).
>
> That's right. And it's boring...
*Yawn*...
~Grauw
--
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>><<<<<<<<<<<<<<
email me: [EMAIL PROTECTED] or ICQ: 10196372
visit my homepage at http://grauw.blehq.org/
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>><<<<<<<<<<<<<<
****
Problems? contact [EMAIL PROTECTED] See also http://www.faq.msxnet.org/
****
