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 ...) > > 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.
Ah, ok. That's an important part of the puzzle. > > 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: OK. So, either pppd 2.4.4 is broken in the same way on both platforms (plausible) or the old version in OpenSolaris has come unglued. I'll try to replicate this. > > 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.. They are, but since you're not authenticating against a real Microsoft peer, that's likely not part of the problem. -- 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]
