Charles Angelich wrote: > > Your time in the spotlight may be shorter than you think,
Which spotlight is that? The 27 people who subscribe to this list? > and being ignored by those you have stepped on may become > the 'norm'. I'm happy being ignored. I get more work done. BTW who have I stepped on? > >The only way to clarify this problem is to determine > >*exactly* which method of authentication the offending > >ISP uses. PAP, CHAP, whatever. Note: I think there > >is a variant of PAP (?) provided by MicroSoft that is > >somewhat different from the standard. > > As Howard Eisenberg what his ISP uses. It won't work on > that one either. I'm not asking. You are the one worried about eznet. I was merely suggesting a rational way of approaching the issue. If, for example, both ISPs in question use MS-CHAP (or whatever it is), then we have a starting point. Simply saying "it doesn't work, it doesn't work" gets us nowhere. > there are two 'homepages' with different version on them. Don't blame me. I was happy to move on to 2.01 and leave 1.8 in the past. However, several people want the libc5/ kernel-2.0 version to continue. And that's fine by me. Cheers, Steven To unsubscribe from SURVPC send a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with unsubscribe SURVPC in the body of the message. Also, trim this footer from any quoted replies. More info can be found at; http://www.softcon.com/archives/SURVPC.html
