> > 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 ...)
 
it's not Windows domain indeed -- i'm testing it with Linux Debian 4.0, pppd 
2.4.4, pptp 1.7.0.
also i've tested it with my ISP too -- i'm not sure what do they use there, but 
there's no domain name too.

> 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.)

hm, i don't know what do this numbers mean :).
but pppd 2.4.4 on solaris is able to authenicate:

Using /dev/pts/3
Using interface ppp0
Connect: ppp0 <--> /dev/pts/3
sent [LCP ConfReq id=0x1 <asyncmap 0x0> <magic 0xdecb121b> <pcomp> <accomp>]
rcvd [LCP ConfReq id=0x1 <asyncmap 0x0> <auth chap MS-v2> <magic 0x250b2c51> 
<pcomp> <accomp>]
sent [LCP ConfAck id=0x1 <asyncmap 0x0> <auth chap MS-v2> <magic 0x250b2c51> 
<pcomp> <accomp>]
rcvd [LCP ConfAck id=0x1 <asyncmap 0x0> <magic 0xdecb121b> <pcomp> <accomp>]
rcvd [LCP EchoReq id=0x0 magic=0x250b2c51]
sent [LCP EchoRep id=0x0 magic=0xdecb121b]
rcvd [CHAP Challenge id=0x31 <910afa5b6aa1f9bd5f6cd44922b29ec4>, name = "pptpd"]
sent [CHAP Response id=0x31 
<b07366eae23167c67a2bf2c0e74e66270000000000000000184d7b9332784b275ee85bf162758f27643380212dd0636700>,
 name = "killers"]
rcvd [CHAP Success id=0x31 "S=ECF23978B906B5E9D5918F830D178DE975A582D6 M=Access 
granted"]
CHAP authentication succeeded

if i change password to invalid one access denied message looks same as 
previous one:

rcvd [CHAP Failure id=0x84 "E=691 R=1 C=03a11e6358c3f3132e3403b8028c55b6 V=0 
M=Access denied"]


 > I'm not wild about the miscompilation theory either, but I can't say I
 > have a better one at this point.

if you say names w/o domain are unusual, maybe that's the case..
 
 
This message posted from opensolaris.org
_______________________________________________
networking-discuss mailing list
[email protected]

Reply via email to