Topic: pppoe connect fails with sme 5.6

[Lothar Maier]

I need some help with german tdsl.
pppoe worked for me until i did upgrade to 5.6.

Logfile:
Feb  4 20:03:17 silch2 pppd[13414]: pppd 2.4.2b1 started by root, uid 0
Feb  4 20:03:17 silch2 pppd[13414]: using channel 162
Feb  4 20:03:17 silch2 pppd[13414]: Using interface ppp0
Feb  4 20:03:17 silch2 pppd[13414]: Connect: ppp0 <--> /dev/pts/0
Feb  4 20:03:17 silch2 /etc/hotplug/net.agent: assuming ppp0 is already up
Feb  4 20:03:17 silch2 pppoe[13458]: PADS: Service-Name: ''
Feb  4 20:03:17 silch2 pppoe[13458]: PPP session is 2221
Feb  4 20:03:18 silch2 pppd[13414]: sent [LCP ConfReq id=0x1 ]
Feb  4 20:03:18 silch2 pppd[13414]: rcvd [LCP ConfReq id=0xb8 ]
Feb  4 20:03:18 silch2 pppd[13414]: No auth is possible
Feb  4 20:03:18 silch2 pppd[13414]: sent [LCP ConfRej id=0xb8 ]
Feb  4 20:03:18 silch2 pppd[13414]: rcvd [LCP ConfAck id=0x1 ]
Feb  4 20:03:18 silch2 pppd[13414]: rcvd [LCP ConfReq id=0xb9 ]
Feb  4 20:03:18 silch2 pppd[13414]: sent [LCP ConfAck id=0xb9 ]
Feb  4 20:03:18 silch2 pppd[13414]: sent [LCP EchoReq id=0x0 magic=0xe180a289]
Feb  4 20:03:18 silch2 pppd[13414]: sent [IPCP ConfReq id=0x1 ]
Feb  4 20:03:18 silch2 pppd[13414]: rcvd [LCP TermReq id=0xba]
Feb  4 20:03:18 silch2 pppd[13414]: LCP terminated by peer
Feb  4 20:03:18 silch2 pppd[13414]: sent [LCP TermAck id=0xba]
Feb  4 20:03:18 silch2 pppoe[13458]: Session terminated -- received PADT from peer

Username and PW is right, i'm using the same pair in a (working) hardware-router.
Any hint for me?

--
    L. Maier

[Charlie Brady]

Lothar Maier wrote:

> I need some help with german tdsl.
> pppoe worked for me until i did upgrade to 5.6.
>
> Logfile:
> Feb  4 20:03:17 silch2 pppd[13414]: pppd 2.4.2b1 started by
> root, uid 0

Perhaps you haven't upgraded to sme 5.6. SME 5.6 final release included pppd 2.4.2b2-1es2.

Regards

Charlie

[Lothar Maier]

Charlie Brady wrote:
>
> Lothar Maier wrote:
>
> > I need some help with german tdsl.
> > pppoe worked for me until i did upgrade to 5.6.
> >
> > Logfile:
> > Feb  4 20:03:17 silch2 pppd[13414]: pppd 2.4.2b1 started by
> > root, uid 0
>
> Perhaps you haven't upgraded to sme 5.6. SME 5.6 final
> release included pppd 2.4.2b2-1es2.
>

The download was smeserver-5.6unsupported.iso ?!
Rsync is running. I hope my lost hair will grow again ...
--
    L. Maier

[Pat Erler]

hi Lothar,

i have the same problem here, i tracked the problem down to the pppd rpm file distributed with sme 5.6 unsopported.

i wrote to charlie, to have a look into the rpm... i hope he can find a solution because i'm plainly not smart enough for this

if you found another solution, please let it me know here in the forum or by mail,

regards,

PAT

[Charlie Brady]

Lothar Maier wrote:

> > Perhaps you haven't upgraded to sme 5.6. SME 5.6 final
> > release included pppd 2.4.2b2-1es2.
> >  
> The download was smeserver-5.6unsupported.iso ?!
> Rsync is running. I hope my lost hair will grow again ...

My apologies. The pppd in 5.6 final, I notice, wrongly identifies itself as 2.4.2b1.

Back to your original problem, you need to determine why your server is refusing to identify itself:

Feb 4 20:03:18 silch2 pppd[13414]: rcvd [LCP ConfReq id=0xb8 ]
Feb 4 20:03:18 silch2 pppd[13414]: No auth is possible
Feb 4 20:03:18 silch2 pppd[13414]: sent [LCP ConfRej id=0xb8 ]

As a first step, I'd verify that your PPPoE account username and password are contained in /etc/ppp/pap-secrets. Check also the contents of /service/pppoe/pppoe.pppd.conf.

Charlie

[Pat Erler]

Hi Charlie,

thanks for your response.

as lothar and i stated, we had the pppoe connection to the provider up and running before the upgrade and didn't change anything afterwards.

as we see, e-smith changed its configuration file structure for pppoe heavily, so i supect a problem in there.

i suspect two things:

1) permission problem/not finding pap-secrets
2) provider-specific configurationproblem

to point 2) t-online, the provider we try to connect to, has some awkward loginstrings, a normal username looks like that:

00012345678903012345678#0001@t-online.de

i read in some usegroups, that you should make the entry in pap-secrets like this

00012345678903012345678\#0001@t-online.de * passwort

right now, the pap-secrets entry looks like this:

"00012345678903012345678#0001@t-online.de" * "passwort"

my questions is, are the quotes correct? i tried without and with, no success, unfortunately the upgrade didn't make a backup of the original file..

for completenes sake, i post again the whole errormessage from
/var/log/messages:

what disturbes me most is the "No auth is possible" message even before an authentification string is sent!


Feb  6 11:32:37 orbit pppd[8847]: pppd 2.4.2b1 started by root, uid 0
Feb  6 11:32:37 orbit pppd[8847]: using channel 97
Feb  6 11:32:37 orbit pppd[8847]: Using interface ppp0
Feb  6 11:32:37 orbit pppd[8847]: Connect: ppp0 <--> /dev/pts/4
Feb  6 11:32:37 orbit /etc/hotplug/net.agent: assuming ppp0 is already up
Feb  6 11:32:37 orbit pppoe[8891]: PADS: Service-Name: ''
Feb  6 11:32:37 orbit pppoe[8891]: PPP session is 40440
Feb  6 11:32:38 orbit pppd[8847]: sent [LCP ConfReq id=0x1 ]
Feb  6 11:32:38 orbit pppd[8847]: rcvd [LCP ConfReq id=0xa7 ]
Feb  6 11:32:38 orbit pppd[8847]: No auth is possible
Feb  6 11:32:38 orbit pppd[8847]: sent [LCP ConfRej id=0xa7 ]
Feb  6 11:32:38 orbit pppd[8847]: rcvd [LCP ConfAck id=0x1 ]
Feb  6 11:32:38 orbit pppd[8847]: rcvd [LCP ConfReq id=0xa8 ]
Feb  6 11:32:38 orbit pppd[8847]: No auth is possible
Feb  6 11:32:38 orbit pppd[8847]: sent [LCP ConfRej id=0xa8 ]
Feb  6 11:32:38 orbit pppd[8847]: rcvd [LCP ConfReq id=0xa9 ]
Feb  6 11:32:38 orbit pppd[8847]: No auth is possible
Feb  6 11:32:38 orbit pppd[8847]: sent [LCP ConfRej id=0xa9 ]
Feb  6 11:32:38 orbit pppd[8847]: rcvd [LCP ConfReq id=0xaa ]
Feb  6 11:32:38 orbit pppd[8847]: No auth is possible
Feb  6 11:32:38 orbit pppd[8847]: sent [LCP ConfRej id=0xaa ]
Feb  6 11:32:38 orbit pppd[8847]: rcvd [LCP ConfReq id=0xab ]
Feb  6 11:32:38 orbit pppd[8847]: No auth is possible
Feb  6 11:32:38 orbit pppd[8847]: sent [LCP ConfRej id=0xab ]
Feb  6 11:32:38 orbit pppd[8847]: rcvd [LCP TermReq id=0xac]
Feb  6 11:32:38 orbit pppd[8847]: sent [LCP TermAck id=0xac]
Feb  6 11:32:38 orbit pppoe[8891]: Session terminated -- received PADT from peer
Feb  6 11:32:38 orbit pppd[8847]: Script /usr/sbin/pppoe -I eth1 -T 400 -U -m 1412 finished (pid 8891), status = 0x0
Feb  6 11:32:38 orbit pppd[8847]: Modem hangup
Feb  6 11:32:38 orbit pppd[8847]: Connection terminated.
Feb  6 11:32:38 orbit pppd[8847]: Exit.
Feb  6 11:32:38 orbit /etc/hotplug/net.agent: NET unregister event not supported

[Pat Erler]

i had a look today into the source of pppd 2.4.2b1, the message

 No auth is possible

should only occure if the server on the other side requests an authentication method the client isn't willing to use.

in the case of t-online, the first method asked for is PAP. but the pppd says "no, i don't want this". this should, IMHO, only occure, if we have the option "-pap" in the configuration file - but this is not the case.

conclusion: the pppd supplied by e-smith is plain broken. i had a look at the pppd development side, they are still at 2.4.1.

my question to the developers at e-smith is, isn't it possible to roll back the changes or to offer us t-online users a way to use the original implementation of pppd which came with RH 7.3, the base of e-smith 5.6? just installing the ppp-2.4.1-3.i386.rpm  from the redhat site doesn't work

with hope,

PAT

[Pat Erler]

ok, the problem is solved:

while converting from the old pppd settings in 5.5. to the new one in 5.6 the file /etc/ppp/pap-secrets got the entry:

"123456789012345678901234#0001@t-online.de"     *       "XXX"

while the file /service/pppoe/pppoe.pppd.conf got the line

user 123456789012345678901234#0001@t-online.de

chenging this to

user "123456789012345678901234#0001@t-online.de"

solved the problem...

regards,

PAT

[Charlie Brady]

Pat Erler wrote:

> conclusion: the pppd supplied by e-smith is plain broken. i
> had a look at the pppd development side, they are still at
> 2.4.1.

It works fine for me:

Feb  1 22:41:55 e-smith pppd[6172]: sent [LCP ConfReq id=0x1 ]
Feb  1 22:41:58 e-smith pppd[6172]: sent [LCP ConfReq id=0x1 ]
Feb  1 22:42:00 e-smith pppoe[6209]: PADS: Service-Name: ''
Feb  1 22:42:00 e-smith pppoe[6209]: PPP session is 293
Feb  1 22:42:00 e-smith pppd[6172]: rcvd [LCP ConfReq id=0xfa ]
Feb  1 22:42:00 e-smith pppd[6172]: sent [LCP ConfAck id=0xfa ]
Feb  1 22:42:00 e-smith pppd[6172]: rcvd [LCP ConfAck id=0x1 ]
Feb  1 22:42:00 e-smith pppd[6172]: sent [LCP EchoReq id=0x0 magic=0x1afe6bf9]
Feb  1 22:42:00 e-smith pppd[6172]: sent [PAP AuthReq id=0x1 user="charlieb@xxxxxxx" password=]
...

Charlie

[Lothar Maier]

Charlie Brady wrote:
>
> Pat Erler wrote:
>
> > conclusion: the pppd supplied by e-smith is plain broken. i
> > had a look at the pppd development side, they are still at
> > 2.4.1.
>
> It works fine for me:
[ .. ]
> Charlie

Adding quotation marks did it:

copy /etc/e-smith/templates/var/service/pppoe/pppoe.pppd.conf/username
to /etc/e-smith/templates-custom/var/service/pppoe/pppoe.pppd.conf/username
change user { "$DialupUserAccount" }
to user { "\"$DialupUserAccount\"" }

Thanks for your help.
--
    Lo