Date: Fri, 1 Aug 1997 08:11:53 +0930 (CST) From: Greg Lehey <grog@lemis.com> To: gabor@acm.org (Gabor Kincses) Cc: archie@whistle.com, hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: PPP chap problem Message-ID: <199707312241.IAA07609@freebie.lemis.com> In-Reply-To: <33E019CE.167EB0E7@acm.org> from Gabor Kincses at "Jul 30, 97 11:51:26 pm"
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Gabor Kincses writes: > Archie Cobbs wrote: >> >>> I have tried to make chap work, but no go. I have used pap and no >>> authentication for over 6 months now, but chap doesn't seem to work. >>> >>> I always get >>> LCP: SendConfigRej(Req-Sent) >>> AUTHPROTO proto = c223 >>> >>> which means that my side rejects chap authentication. >>> Even though I added enable chap, accept chap. >> >> Enable chap means "i want the peer to authenticate to me using chap", >> so you don't want to do that. >> >>> I also tried to disable chap and only accept chap, but that didn't work >> >> Hmm, should have. > > I understood what enable chap meant after reading someone's post on the > newgroup and tried out disable chap and accept chap, which didn't work > either. The really interesting part is that if I say accept pap, then > the SendConfigRej becomes SendConfigNak AUTHPROTO proto = c023, so it > seems there might be something wrong with the chap state in the > code. No. PAP is 0xc023, CHAP is 0xc223 (see net/ppp_defs.h). > Again I'm getting this after I escape out of term into packet mode. Is > there anything different here from executing a script? Well, yes. I don't understand the question. > I only have the 2.1.5 source code, but haven't been able to dig through > the relevant portions. All I can tell that the code never really gets > into the chap.c stuff... That seems unlikely. Have you done a complete trace? There's nothing you've shown here which disproves Archie's suggestion, which I think is correct. Greg
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199707312241.IAA07609>