Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Tue, 20 Jan 2004 00:28:45 +1100
From:      nil000@cse.unsw.edu.au
To:        niranjan@monsoonrain.net
Cc:        freebsd-net@freebsd.org
Subject:   Re: PPPoE problem: "Too many LQR packets lost"
Message-ID:  <400BDB8D.4070807@cse.unsw.edu.au>
In-Reply-To: <1074451944.400ad5e888ba4@www.monsoonrain.net>
References:  <4009C0D5.2070209@cse.unsw.edu.au> <1074451944.400ad5e888ba4@www.monsoonrain.net>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
niranjan@monsoonrain.net wrote:
[ ... ]
> 
>>Short of actually fixing this LQR negotiation issue (?), might the 
>>suggestion of a ppp.conf option to force LCP echo usage be good?
>>
> 
> 
> Yes. I am surprized it doesn't already have that option since thats
> a more common scenario. Alternately you could use another pppoe 
> implementation, perhaps the one based on pppd/netgraph. 
> 
> BTW, the lcp.c patch suggested by someone else is not the correct 
> approach.
> 
> There also seems to be a problem with the way the FreeBSD kernel PPP
> implementation handles LQR and you can see it in the log below. (The
> unisphere at the other end isn't perfect either and has its own 
> issues!)
> 
> regards,
> niranjan
> 

Thanks for your analysis Niranjan.  Could you please elaborate on what 
you meant about the lcp.c patch not being the correct approach?  I think 
Mike has tested it in multiple situations, and it has worked well for a 
guy in the same situation down here too.

cheers,

nik



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?400BDB8D.4070807>