Alex Mizrahi writes: > sent [CHAP Response id=0x50 > <0ff46b98f19dc359f9a65b303e26376100000000000000005792aaab8702891ae0a5a4d32e7c4ef6537309002391a42700>, > name = "killers"] > rcvd [CHAP Failure id=0x50 "E=691 R=1 C=cf1f4d78f11fda173bd283e580c850de V=0 > M=Access denied"]
The user name you're giving to the peer is unusual. Are you sure that "killers" is right? Most MS-CHAP usages I've seen include a Windows domain name, something like "psycho\\killers". (Of course, then we'll all know your passphrase ...) The message you're getting there seems odd. The "V=0" value isn't defined anywhere -- it's supposed to be "V=2" for MS-CHAPv1 and "V=3" for MS-CHAPv2. (No, I don't know why it's off by one.) Are you really talking to a Microsoft system? What is that peer? > > Sure; the source is in the ON consolidation, and is based off an older > > version of that same open source code, but with a lot of local > > customizations (some of which haven't yet made it out to the open > > source). > > ok, i'll try to compile it too -- maybe it works if freshly compiled.. That seems unlikely. > > I don't _think_ it's related to the problem you're having, as the > > MS-CHAP and MS-CHAPv2 code currently in Solaris were originally tested > > against Microsoft's implementation. > > some change in compiler could cause one of hash functions used invalid. or if > you say "originally" it can be tested only on SPARC. No. We've been developing and testing on both SPARC and x86 for quite a long time now. Longer than I've been at Sun. It's a fundamental requirement. I'm not wild about the miscompilation theory either, but I can't say I have a better one at this point. -- James Carlson, Solaris Networking <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sun Microsystems / 35 Network Drive 71.232W Vox +1 781 442 2084 MS UBUR02-212 / Burlington MA 01803-2757 42.496N Fax +1 781 442 1677 _______________________________________________ networking-discuss mailing list [email protected]
