[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: diald and ppp



I now have diald dialing but I am not getting connected.
In my ppp lg I get the following errors.
pppd[286]: sent [LCP ConfReg id=0x1 <magic 0xffffa064>
<pcomp> <accomp>]
last message repeated 9 times
pppd[286]: LCP: timeout sending Config-Requests
pppd[286]: Connection Terminated
pppd[286]: Exit.

And I noticed in the diald.log that it says the site it is dialing is
172.16.1.100. In my working Debian system the site it is dialing is a
valid internet address, probably the address that my isp assigns my 
modem when I get connected. Also while the non working computer is connected
to the isp, about 30 seconds if I do a ifconfig the ip address on sl0 is
the fake one I gave it in the diald.options file. What would keep the 
isp from giving me an ip address. I think that is the problem.

> > I am trying to set up diald and ppp. I thought it would be easy like it
> > was with Debian 1.3, but I guess Debian developers or someone wanted to
> > keep me on my toes so they changed stuff.
> 
> pppd has changed.  Your old scripts aren't going to work.  Have you tried
> pppconfig?
> 
> > exec pppd connect \
> > 'chat -v -f /etc/diald/manconnect' \
> > -detach crtscts ttyS0 defaultroute \
> > user infinetwork \
> > /dev/ttyS0 115200
> 
> You have 'ttyS0' and also '/dev/ttyS0'.  I think this is going to confuse
> pppd.
> 
> > I am using pap-secrets also.
> 
> Then you will need to get the option 'user username' to pppd so that it can
> find the secret.  Add this line to diald.options:
> 
> pppd-options user infinetwork
> 
> If you run pppconfig you can use the chatscript it generates for diald by
> replacing 
> 
> connect "/etc/diald/connect"
> 
> with 
> 
> connect "/etc/chatscripts/provider"
> -- 
> John Hasler
> john@dhh.gt.org (John Hasler)
> Dancing Horse Hill
> Elmwood, WI
> 
> 


-- 
Thanks,
Keith
********************************************************************************
Debian GNU/Linux			http://www.naples.net/~nfn11988			


Reply to: