On 28 December 2011 21:36, percy piper <piper.pe...@gmail.com> wrote:
> pppoe(4) did not work. We need to authenticate with chap first, then > pap. pppoe(4) forces the exclusive use of either one or the other. Actually this is not true. Both use chap. There is no pap. The first chap challenge succeeds (to the BT AC) the second chap challenge does not. No authentication failure response is received, we just get another chap challenge and this repeats until a timeout occurs. If we deliberately use an incorrect secret the first chap challenge fails and we do get an auth fail response from BT's AC, so it seems that BT's AC accepts our chap auth response but our ISP's AC does not. Very odd especially as userland ppp does not exhibit this odd behaviour at all. It may be that our ISP's AC is dropping the pppoe(4) auth response packet as invalid (why?) or it never receives it which would explain the lack of a response. I will need to comb through the packet captures from both userland and kernel pppoe to see if I can find any relevant difference. Has anyone else seen anything like this? This is with both the Dec 20th i386 snap and 4.9 i386 release.
