PPP question (my DSL is down !!)
For as long as I've been using Debian, I've had DSL and never the need to use dial-up... Last Thursday though, my DSL modem died and I tried connecting with dial-up. Running 'pppconfig' worked fine and I'm able to connect. Tail'ing /var/log/messages shows everything good, up to assigning an IP address (and depending on how I have DNS set, receiving DNS entries). Problem is, I can't do anything...This includes pinging a website by IP address. That rules out a DNS problem, doesn't it ?? I can ping the address I'm assigned (local) and the remote address that /var/log/messages shows me (remote). I saw a recent post about the file tcp_ecn being set to either '0' or '1'. Well, I don't have that file. I tried 'touch tcp_ecn' and it didn't work. I tried 'echo 0 tcp_ecn' (in the proper dir) and it didn't work either, nor did it create the file. Hopefully my replacement modem will be showing up very soon, but I'd still like to have the ability to use dial-up if needed. Any ideas and/or help ?? Thanks in advance Hall
Re: PPP question (my DSL is down !!)
On Mon, Oct 08, 2001 at 10:34:17AM -0400, Hall Stevenson wrote: For as long as I've been using Debian, I've had DSL and never the need to use dial-up... Last Thursday though, my DSL modem died and I tried connecting with dial-up. Running 'pppconfig' worked fine and I'm able to connect. Tail'ing /var/log/messages shows everything good, up to assigning an IP address (and depending on how I have DNS set, receiving DNS entries). Problem is, I can't do anything...This includes pinging a website by IP address. That rules out a DNS problem, doesn't it ?? I can ping the address I'm assigned (local) and the remote address that /var/log/messages shows me (remote). I don't know if this is your problem, but I recently helped a friend troubleshoot his mandrake laptop, and found that to get ppp to work we had to bring down eth0 for some reason. It seems like you shouldn't have to, but you could try that, if you still have your eth0 up. -- David Roundy http://civet.berkeley.edu/droundy/
Re: PPP question (my DSL is down !!)
Hall Stevenson wrote: For as long as I've been using Debian, I've had DSL and never the need to use dial-up... Last Thursday though, my DSL modem died and I tried connecting with dial-up. Running 'pppconfig' worked fine and I'm able to connect. Tail'ing /var/log/messages shows everything good, up to assigning an IP address (and depending on how I have DNS set, receiving DNS entries). Problem is, I can't do anything...This includes pinging a website by IP address. That rules out a DNS problem, doesn't it ?? I can ping the address I'm assigned (local) and the remote address that /var/log/messages shows me (remote). I saw a recent post about the file tcp_ecn being set to either '0' or '1'. Well, I don't have that file. I tried 'touch tcp_ecn' and it didn't work. I tried 'echo 0 tcp_ecn' (in the proper dir) and it didn't work either, nor did it create the file. Hopefully my replacement modem will be showing up very soon, but I'd still like to have the ability to use dial-up if needed. Any ideas and/or help ?? Do you have a gateway defined in /etc/network/interfaces? If so, # (comment) it out as long as you are using ppp. PPP will set its own default gateway. I have a similar problem when I try to use ppp on a machine that usually connects to the net via ethernet. Hope this helps. -- David Raeker-Jordan mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Harrisburg, PA, USA
Re: PPP question (my DSL is down !!)
Running 'pppconfig' worked fine and I'm able to connect. Tail'ing /var/log/messages shows everything good, up to assigning an IP address (and depending on how I have DNS set, receiving DNS entries). Problem is, I can't do anything...This includes pinging a website by IP address. That rules out a DNS problem, doesn't it ?? You probably have a defaultroute pointing to eth0 and pppd won't replace it. Remove that defaultroute and ppp shoul work. -- John Hasler [EMAIL PROTECTED] (John Hasler) Dancing Horse Hill Elmwood, WI
Re: PPP question (my DSL is down !!)
I don't know if this is your problem, but I recently helped a friend troubleshoot his mandrake laptop, and found that to get ppp to work we had to bring down eth0 for some reason. It seems like you shouldn't have to, but you could try that, if you still have your eth0 up. I'll certainly try this and report how/if it works, but that leads to other issues (these aren't directed at you, David). What if I was using this box as an internet gateway for other machines ?? Why disable my ethernet network for file transers, etc because I'm connecting to the internet ?? Hall
Re: PPP question (my DSL is down !!)
Do you have a gateway defined in /etc/network/interfaces? Sure do. It points to my Linksys router/switch, 192.168.1.1. With dial-up, that device is no longer valid. If so, # (comment) it out as long as you are using ppp. PPP will set its own default gateway. I have a similar problem when I try to use ppp on a machine that usually connects to the net via ethernet. You probably have a defaultroute pointing to eth0 and pppd won't replace it. Remove that defaultroute and ppp shoul work. Those both make perfect sense and go along with what David Roundy said about bringing eth0 down. It seems like dial-up and eth0 should have their own network config files, doesn't it ?? Thanks for the ideas ! Regards Hall
Re: PPP question (my DSL is down !!)
On Mon, Oct 08, 2001 at 11:10:03AM -0400, Hall Stevenson wrote: | I don't know if this is your problem, but I recently | helped a friend troubleshoot his mandrake laptop, | and found that to get ppp to work we had to bring | down eth0 for some reason. It seems like you | shouldn't have to, but you could try that, if you still | have your eth0 up. | | I'll certainly try this and report how/if it works, but that | leads to other issues (these aren't directed at you, David). | | What if I was using this box as an internet gateway for other | machines ?? Why disable my ethernet network for file transers, | etc because I'm connecting to the internet ?? Bringing down eth0 probably removed the default route which solved the problem above (also what others suggested). I can verify, though, that using a machine as an ethernet LAN = PPP WAN gateway works quite well. I had a 486 machine set up to do this until I got DSL. HTH, -D
Re: PPP question (my DSL is down !!)
... I can verify, though, that using a machine as an ethernet LAN = PPP WAN gateway works quite well... I don't doubt that it does, but this machine probably *always* uses ppp, right ?? That's not my case. I defined an actual gateway, which I wouldn't do with a normal ppp config. Hall
Re: PPP question (my DSL is down !!)
On Mon, Oct 08, 2001 at 11:57:15AM -0400, Hall Stevenson wrote: | ... I can verify, though, that using a machine as an | ethernet LAN = PPP WAN gateway works quite | well... | | I don't doubt that it does, but this machine probably *always* | uses ppp, right ?? That's not my case. I defined an actual | gateway, which I wouldn't do with a normal ppp config. Yes, that box always used PPP to get to the internet. Though if eth0 is hooked to the DSL modem, then you don't really have a reason to have it up when the DSL is down so it shouldn't be a big problem for you. -D
ppp question [*]
hello everybody: is ppp 2.3.11 work with linux kernel 2.3.11 ? thank you. maths [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: ppp question [*]
is ppp 2.3.11 work with linux kernel 2.3.11 ? Could be possible! I needed an upgrade to ppp 2.4.0 to use it with kernel-2-4.0.
PPP question.
Hi all, In my /var/log/ppp.log, I have a line saying that: Dec 6 19:17:50 virge pppd[558]: Serial connection established. Dec 6 19:17:51 virge pppd[558]: speed 112150 not supported Dec 6 19:17:51 virge pppd[558]: Using interface ppp0 What did I do wrong?? Thanks. Shao.
Re: PPP question.
On Sun, 6 Dec 1998, Shao Zhang wrote: Hi all, In my /var/log/ppp.log, I have a line saying that: Dec 6 19:17:50 virge pppd[558]: Serial connection established. Dec 6 19:17:51 virge pppd[558]: speed 112150 not supported Dec 6 19:17:51 virge pppd[558]: Using interface ppp0 What did I do wrong?? The speed should be 115200 I guess... Regards, Ruud.
Re: PPP question.
On Sun, 6 Dec 1998, Shao Zhang wrote: Hi all, In my /var/log/ppp.log, I have a line saying that: Dec 6 19:17:50 virge pppd[558]: Serial connection established. Dec 6 19:17:51 virge pppd[558]: speed 112150 not supported Dec 6 19:17:51 virge pppd[558]: Using interface ppp0 What did I do wrong?? Thanks. Shao. I think you need to change the speed specified in /etc/ppp/peers/provider (or whatever you named your connection) to 115200. I think the system chokes on non-standard speeds. -- Kent West [EMAIL PROTECTED] KC5ENO - Amateur Radio: When all else fails. Linux - Finally! A real OS for the Intel PC! Life is an ongoing classroom. - Capt. James T. Kirk, Dreadnought
(non-debian) PPP question.
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- I have two different modems that I make PPP connections with. Is there a way to force them to us the same network interface every time? serial-ppp1 uses ppp0 ISDN-ppp2 uses ppp1 every time? I use mrtg to track traffic and the interfaces flip around. Thanks! - -Eric -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: 2.6.3a Charset: noconv iQCVAwUBNC3Ra6DN4t3E2gMVAQFmmQP/aZ0FizpMIZ/KdBCKTj8vzgthHl7xO2Aq TAAZuR6uIrJZYhtWAHsx2DNZbdqCRigNHWvsX0DmXmVPps/ygRwhlYMBD2dZF++x Sm586l+nwZnPHl5OVnQm8TM5esoXSaW6nhOKYBtg22Jb5Oiptkch/SryS7+6J3Cv ktzYqqDDbz4= =PUF7 -END PGP SIGNATURE- -- TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word unsubscribe to [EMAIL PROTECTED] . Trouble? e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] .
Re: Incoming PPP question - subnetting
On Thu, 18 Sep 1997 15:36:01 -0500, Jens B. Jorgensen wrote: Kevin Traas wrote: Hmmm. What's the netmask on the ethernet interface? If it's set to 255.255.255.224 then everything should work fine even though Yes, it is. Then NT's routing algorithm is wrong or there are other routes afoot. Run netstat -r on the NT box to verify that the routes to the ethernet interface have 255.255.255.224 as the netmask. the NT box sets 255.255.255.0 on the PPP link. This is because the routing algorithm chooses the route with the most matching bits (that is, the one with the longest netmask). Let me know. Interesting thought. I'll give this a try. I've got things working right now by setting up the PPP connection and then manually setting routes on each end. However, if I can automate this, that would be great. With your msg above, I may not have to make any changes on the NT dialin box/router. I'll let you know. On this subject, though Right now, the NT box dials into the modem pool via PPP. Is there any way I can have the Linux box (PPP server) setup a static route to the NT subnet at the time the NT box dials in? (I could set up a script running in the background with a sleep 60 or so that looks to see who's logged in and configures the routing table based on that, but this would be quite a hack - there's got to be a better way) Sure, you can give pppd the path to an ip-up and an ip-down script which will be called when the connection comes up. A much cleaner way would be to run portslave, the RADIUS client. You will let you spec all of this on a per user and per port basis. - http://www.psychosis.com/emc/ Elite MicroComputers 908-541-4214 http://www.psychosis.com/linux-router/ Linux Router Project -- TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word unsubscribe to [EMAIL PROTECTED] . Trouble? e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] .
Re: Incoming PPP question - subnetting
Kevin Traas wrote: Hmmm. What's the netmask on the ethernet interface? If it's set to 255.255.255.224 then everything should work fine even though Yes, it is. Then NT's routing algorithm is wrong or there are other routes afoot. Run netstat -r on the NT box to verify that the routes to the ethernet interface have 255.255.255.224 as the netmask. the NT box sets 255.255.255.0 on the PPP link. This is because the routing algorithm chooses the route with the most matching bits (that is, the one with the longest netmask). Let me know. Interesting thought. I'll give this a try. I've got things working right now by setting up the PPP connection and then manually setting routes on each end. However, if I can automate this, that would be great. With your msg above, I may not have to make any changes on the NT dialin box/router. I'll let you know. On this subject, though Right now, the NT box dials into the modem pool via PPP. Is there any way I can have the Linux box (PPP server) setup a static route to the NT subnet at the time the NT box dials in? (I could set up a script running in the background with a sleep 60 or so that looks to see who's logged in and configures the routing table based on that, but this would be quite a hack - there's got to be a better way) Sure, you can give pppd the path to an ip-up and an ip-down script which will be called when the connection comes up. -- Jens B. Jorgensen [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word unsubscribe to [EMAIL PROTECTED] . Trouble? e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] .
Re: Incoming PPP question - subnetting
Kevin Traas wrote: Thanks for the reply (and the info), Jens. Here's what I'm trying to do: I've got one assigned Class C - 206.182.236.0 - which I've split using a netmask of 255.255.255.224. I'm using one subnet of 206.182.236.32 for my local LAN. My Debian Linux box is IP .33 and acts as a DialdD server to ISP as well as modem server for two lines (these incoming PPP connects are in the same subnet - .32) I have another subnet for another LAN in another building (.64). This LAN has an NT server that I'm using to dial into the Linux box and provide routing to/from this subnet. Problem is that this NT box sets up a netmask of 255.255.255.0 for the .32 subnet that it has connected to via PPP. From this point on, all IP traffic on the local subnet gets routed out the PPP connection. (Pretty bad scene - we've got 100Base-TX going into 33.6Kbps...) Other than manually configuring the routing tables on the NT box, I'd like to configure things automatically - thus my message about setting netmasks Hmmm. What's the netmask on the ethernet interface? If it's set to 255.255.255.224 then everything should work fine even though the NT box sets 255.255.255.224 on the PPP link. This is because the routing algorithm chooses the route with the most matching bits (that is, the one with the longest netmask). Let me know. -- Jens B. Jorgensen [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word unsubscribe to [EMAIL PROTECTED] . Trouble? e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] .
Re: Incoming PPP question - subnetting
Hmmm. What's the netmask on the ethernet interface? If it's set to 255.255.255.224 then everything should work fine even though Yes, it is. the NT box sets 255.255.255.0 on the PPP link. This is because the routing algorithm chooses the route with the most matching bits (that is, the one with the longest netmask). Let me know. Interesting thought. I'll give this a try. I've got things working right now by setting up the PPP connection and then manually setting routes on each end. However, if I can automate this, that would be great. With your msg above, I may not have to make any changes on the NT dialin box/router. I'll let you know. On this subject, though Right now, the NT box dials into the modem pool via PPP. Is there any way I can have the Linux box (PPP server) setup a static route to the NT subnet at the time the NT box dials in? (I could set up a script running in the background with a sleep 60 or so that looks to see who's logged in and configures the routing table based on that, but this would be quite a hack - there's got to be a better way) Thanks for your help, Jens. Later, Kevin Traas Baan Business Systems Systems Analyst Langley, BC, Canada [EMAIL PROTECTED] (604) 882-8169 http://www.baan-bbs.ca --- Linux is not user-friendly. It _is_ user-friendly. It's just not ignorant-friendly or idiot-friendly. -- TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word unsubscribe to [EMAIL PROTECTED] . Trouble? e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] .
Incoming PPP question - subnetting
I'm having a problem configuring dialin PPP access on my system. (Debian 1.3.1, PPPD 2.2 pl0) I've allocated a subnet of addresses to the incoming lines and tried setting the subnet mask in /etc/ppp/options to netmask 255.255.255.224; however, my incoming clients have netmasks of 255.255.255.0. Could this be a problem with the client, or is it the server? Anyone else doing this? Kevin Traas Baan Business Systems Systems Analyst Langley, BC, Canada [EMAIL PROTECTED] (604) 882-8169 http://www.baan-bbs.ca --- Linux is not user-friendly. It _is_ user-friendly. It's just not ignorant-friendly or idiot-friendly. -- TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word unsubscribe to [EMAIL PROTECTED] . Trouble? e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] .
Re: Incoming PPP question - subnetting
Kevin Traas wrote: I'm having a problem configuring dialin PPP access on my system. (Debian 1.3.1, PPPD 2.2 pl0) I've allocated a subnet of addresses to the incoming lines and tried setting the subnet mask in /etc/ppp/options to netmask 255.255.255.224; however, my incoming clients have netmasks of 255.255.255.0. Could this be a problem with the client, or is it the server? PS. The netmask should be 255.255.255.255 on your end. I'm guessing this will fix your problem. -- Jens B. Jorgensen [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word unsubscribe to [EMAIL PROTECTED] . Trouble? e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] .
Re: Incoming PPP question - subnetting
Kevin Traas wrote: I'm having a problem configuring dialin PPP access on my system. (Debian 1.3.1, PPPD 2.2 pl0) I've allocated a subnet of addresses to the incoming lines and tried setting the subnet mask in /etc/ppp/options to netmask 255.255.255.224; however, my incoming clients have netmasks of 255.255.255.0. Could this be a problem with the client, or is it the server? Anyone else doing this? The netmask is not a negotiated option. That is, you don't tell the peer what netmask to use and he doesn't tell you. The netmask is something you assign to the interface, just as you would to an ethernet interface. If you don't supply a netmask, one will be computed for you, based upon the class of the address (determined by the 2 high-order bits of the IP address). What's the problem really? -- Jens B. Jorgensen [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word unsubscribe to [EMAIL PROTECTED] . Trouble? e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] .
Re: Incoming PPP question - subnetting
Thanks for the reply (and the info), Jens. Here's what I'm trying to do: I've got one assigned Class C - 206.182.236.0 - which I've split using a netmask of 255.255.255.224. I'm using one subnet of 206.182.236.32 for my local LAN. My Debian Linux box is IP .33 and acts as a DialdD server to ISP as well as modem server for two lines (these incoming PPP connects are in the same subnet - .32) I have another subnet for another LAN in another building (.64). This LAN has an NT server that I'm using to dial into the Linux box and provide routing to/from this subnet. Problem is that this NT box sets up a netmask of 255.255.255.0 for the .32 subnet that it has connected to via PPP. From this point on, all IP traffic on the local subnet gets routed out the PPP connection. (Pretty bad scene - we've got 100Base-TX going into 33.6Kbps...) Other than manually configuring the routing tables on the NT box, I'd like to configure things automatically - thus my message about setting netmasks Later, Kevin Traas Baan Business Systems Systems Analyst Langley, BC, Canada [EMAIL PROTECTED] (604) 882-8169 http://www.baan-bbs.ca --- Linux is not user-friendly. It _is_ user-friendly. It's just not ignorant-friendly or idiot-friendly. -Original Message- From: Jens B. Jorgensen [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Kevin Traas [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: debian-user@lists.debian.org debian-user@lists.debian.org Date: Wednesday, September 17, 1997 12:04 PM Subject: Re: Incoming PPP question - subnetting Kevin Traas wrote: I'm having a problem configuring dialin PPP access on my system. (Debian 1.3.1, PPPD 2.2 pl0) I've allocated a subnet of addresses to the incoming lines and tried setting the subnet mask in /etc/ppp/options to netmask 255.255.255.224; however, my incoming clients have netmasks of 255.255.255.0. Could this be a problem with the client, or is it the server? Anyone else doing this? The netmask is not a negotiated option. That is, you don't tell the peer what netmask to use and he doesn't tell you. The netmask is something you assign to the interface, just as you would to an ethernet interface. If you don't supply a netmask, one will be computed for you, based upon the class of the address (determined by the 2 high-order bits of the IP address). What's the problem really? -- Jens B. Jorgensen [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word unsubscribe to [EMAIL PROTECTED] . Trouble? e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] . -- TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word unsubscribe to [EMAIL PROTECTED] . Trouble? e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] .
PPP question.
I have a BitsurfrPro EZ modem (ISDN). I can do single channel connections just fine. How ever when I do multi-link PPP (duel channel) I have a LCP EchoReq problems: Jul 28 09:46:18 bitgate pppd[28432]: local IP address 206.163.127.171 Jul 28 09:46:18 bitgate pppd[28432]: remote IP address 206.163.127.127 Jul 28 09:46:44 bitgate pppd[28432]: sent [LCP EchoReq id=0x0 00 00 00 00] Jul 28 09:48:10 bitgate pppd[28432]: sent [LCP EchoReq id=0x1 00 00 00 00] Jul 28 09:53:02 bitgate pppd[28432]: sent [LCP EchoReq id=0x2 00 00 00 00] Jul 28 09:53:32 bitgate pppd[28432]: sent [LCP EchoReq id=0x3 00 00 00 00] Jul 28 09:54:02 bitgate pppd[28432]: Excessive lack of response to LCP echo frames. Jul 28 09:54:02 bitgate pppd[28432]: sent [LCP TermReq id=0x3] Jul 28 09:54:02 bitgate pppd[28432]: rcvd [LCP TermAck id=0x3] Jul 28 09:54:02 bitgate pppd[28432]: Connection terminated. Jul 28 09:54:02 bitgate pppd[28432]: Exit. I know this is really not a Debian problem but I could use the help. Thanks! [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word unsubscribe to [EMAIL PROTECTED] . Trouble? e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] .
Re: PPP question.
Add this line to your /etc/ppp/options file (or put it on your ppp command line): lcp-echo-interval 0 Your ISP does not respond to lcp-echo packets (they are used to detect if the link has gone down). Hope this helps, Al Youngwerth [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- From: Udjat -A MiB [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: debian-user@lists.debian.org Subject: PPP question. Date: Monday, July 28, 1997 6:45 AM I have a BitsurfrPro EZ modem (ISDN). I can do single channel connections just fine. How ever when I do multi-link PPP (duel channel) I have a LCP EchoReq problems: Jul 28 09:46:18 bitgate pppd[28432]: local IP address 206.163.127.171 Jul 28 09:46:18 bitgate pppd[28432]: remote IP address 206.163.127.127 Jul 28 09:46:44 bitgate pppd[28432]: sent [LCP EchoReq id=0x0 00 00 00 00] Jul 28 09:48:10 bitgate pppd[28432]: sent [LCP EchoReq id=0x1 00 00 00 00] Jul 28 09:53:02 bitgate pppd[28432]: sent [LCP EchoReq id=0x2 00 00 00 00] Jul 28 09:53:32 bitgate pppd[28432]: sent [LCP EchoReq id=0x3 00 00 00 00] Jul 28 09:54:02 bitgate pppd[28432]: Excessive lack of response to LCP echo frames. Jul 28 09:54:02 bitgate pppd[28432]: sent [LCP TermReq id=0x3] Jul 28 09:54:02 bitgate pppd[28432]: rcvd [LCP TermAck id=0x3] Jul 28 09:54:02 bitgate pppd[28432]: Connection terminated. Jul 28 09:54:02 bitgate pppd[28432]: Exit. I know this is really not a Debian problem but I could use the help. Thanks! [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word unsubscribe to [EMAIL PROTECTED] . Trouble? e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] . -- TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word unsubscribe to [EMAIL PROTECTED] . Trouble? e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] .
Re: PPP question.
Udjat -A MiB wrote: I have a BitsurfrPro EZ modem (ISDN). I can do single channel connections just fine. How ever when I do multi-link PPP (duel channel) I have a LCP EchoReq problems: Jul 28 09:46:18 bitgate pppd[28432]: local IP address 206.163.127.171 Jul 28 09:46:18 bitgate pppd[28432]: remote IP address 206.163.127.127 Jul 28 09:46:44 bitgate pppd[28432]: sent [LCP EchoReq id=0x0 00 00 00 00] Jul 28 09:48:10 bitgate pppd[28432]: sent [LCP EchoReq id=0x1 00 00 00 00] Jul 28 09:53:02 bitgate pppd[28432]: sent [LCP EchoReq id=0x2 00 00 00 00] Jul 28 09:53:32 bitgate pppd[28432]: sent [LCP EchoReq id=0x3 00 00 00 00] Jul 28 09:54:02 bitgate pppd[28432]: Excessive lack of response to LCP echo frames. Jul 28 09:54:02 bitgate pppd[28432]: sent [LCP TermReq id=0x3] Jul 28 09:54:02 bitgate pppd[28432]: rcvd [LCP TermAck id=0x3] Jul 28 09:54:02 bitgate pppd[28432]: Connection terminated. Jul 28 09:54:02 bitgate pppd[28432]: Exit. I know this is really not a Debian problem but I could use the help. Run this: grep -v '^#' /etc/ppp/options | sort -u Do you see lcp-echo-interval ? Remove that line from /etc/ppp/options and your connection will no longer be dropped for lack of responses to LCP echo requests. -- Jens B. Jorgensen [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word unsubscribe to [EMAIL PROTECTED] . Trouble? e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] .
Yet another PPP question
I have been using Debian 1.3 with a 2.1.35 kernel at home. I usually connect to my ISP using xisp but I also have pppd configured. Recently I upgraded to libc6. I'm not sure that I got all the needed pieces in place. One side-effect of the upgrade is that both pppd and xisp now fail immediately after establishing the connection. After running pppd the tail end of /var/adm/messages looks like May 25 10:39:10 localhost chat[200]: slip-server -- got it May 25 10:39:10 localhost chat[200]: send (ppp^M) May 25 10:39:10 localhost pppd[198]: Serial connection established. May 25 10:39:11 localhost pppd[198]: Using interface ppp0 May 25 10:39:11 localhost pppd[198]: Connect: ppp0 -- /dev/cua1 May 25 10:39:13 localhost pppd[198]: Hangup (SIGHUP) May 25 10:39:13 localhost pppd[198]: Modem hangup May 25 10:39:13 localhost pppd[198]: Connection terminated. May 25 10:39:13 localhost pppd[198]: Exit. Any ideas where to start looking for the program that may be failing? -- TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word unsubscribe to [EMAIL PROTECTED] . Trouble? e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] .
RE: Yet another PPP question
On 25-May-97 Douglas Bates wrote: I have been using Debian 1.3 with a 2.1.35 kernel at home. I usually connect to my ISP using xisp but I also have pppd configured. Recently I upgraded to libc6. I'm not sure that I got all the needed pieces in place. One side-effect of the upgrade is that both pppd and xisp now fail immediately after establishing the connection. After running pppd the tail end of /var/adm/messages looks like May 25 10:39:10 localhost chat[200]: slip-server -- got it May 25 10:39:10 localhost chat[200]: send (ppp^M) May 25 10:39:10 localhost pppd[198]: Serial connection established. May 25 10:39:11 localhost pppd[198]: Using interface ppp0 May 25 10:39:11 localhost pppd[198]: Connect: ppp0 -- /dev/cua1 May 25 10:39:13 localhost pppd[198]: Hangup (SIGHUP) May 25 10:39:13 localhost pppd[198]: Modem hangup May 25 10:39:13 localhost pppd[198]: Connection terminated. May 25 10:39:13 localhost pppd[198]: Exit. Any ideas where to start looking for the program that may be failing? -- TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word unsubscribe to [EMAIL PROTECTED] . Trouble? e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] . Most likely in the experimental kernel you are using. -Dee - ||W.D. McKinney (Dee) |E-mail Home: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Work: [EMAIL PROTECTED] |Home: http://www.deesign.com Work: http://www.gci.com - -- TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word unsubscribe to [EMAIL PROTECTED] . Trouble? e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] .
Re: Yet another PPP question
On 25 May, Douglas Bates wrote: I have been using Debian 1.3 with a 2.1.35 kernel at home. I usually connect to my ISP using xisp but I also have pppd configured. Recently I upgraded to libc6. I'm not sure that I got all the needed pieces in place. One side-effect of the upgrade is that both pppd and xisp now fail immediately after establishing the connection. After running pppd the tail end of /var/adm/messages looks like Did you install libc6-dev ? I found something in the changlogfile: glibc (2.0.3-4) unstable; urgency=low * Changed tzconfig to allow Canadian timezones to be selected by name. * Changed libc6-dev to legally replace parts of the man-db, gettext and ppp packages (Bug#9815 abd Bug#9825). -- David Engel [EMAIL PROTECTED] Thu, 15 May 1997 12:35:43 -0500 Hope this helps. I use also use xisp and don't have any problems (knocking on wood), but I didn't install libc6-dev. Ciao, Martin -- TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word unsubscribe to [EMAIL PROTECTED] . Trouble? e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] .
Another PPP Question :(
The biggest problem since I've installed Debian 4 months ago, for me, has been the configuration of dial-up networking. I've installed all the appropriate packages, configured the kernel, and gone through the HOWTOs related to PPP and networking to setup such files as /etc/networks /etc/resolv.conf and others. Yet, I cannot dialup to my ISP and establish a network connection that can recognize systems other than my own. I hope to, on this list, start a diagnosis of this problem with others cooperation. So, first of all, can some kind person submit a connection script and /etc/ppp/options file for a PPP dialup that uses PAP, but still requires an initial login with name and password. Assuming that doesn't work I'll submit all my appropriate networking files to the list for critique. Sincere Thanks, Kevin Cols, Oh -- This message was distributed manually by [EMAIL PROTECTED] after the list initially failed to distribute it.
