To answer my own question:
I had the mux type set wrong -- VC-based instead of
LLC-based.
While the line comes up, the session is never opened because
of the mux
mismatch.
moving right along now...
Gary
> The freebsd box is connected directly via ed1 to the
dsl modem;
> a crossover cable is used; the packets are clearly
reaching the modem,
> as it records them as received.
> I've simplified ppp.conf to the following, essentially
the ppp.conf.sample:
>
> default:
> set log all -timer
>
> blackfoot:
> set device PPPoE:ed1
> enable lqr echo
> set cd 5
> set redial 0 0
> set dial
> set login
> set authname xxxxxxxx
> set authkey yyyyyyyy
> add! default HISADDR
>
>
> #ifconfig ed1
> ed1:
flags=8943<UP,BROADCAST,RUNNING,PROMISC,SIMPLEX,MULTICAST
> mtu 1500
> inet6 fe80::220:18ff:fe72:8b72%ed1 prefixlen 64
scopeid 0x3
> ether 00:20:18:72:8b:72
>
> #tcpdump -efntl -i ed1
> tcpdump: WARNING: ed1: no IPv4 address assigned
> tcpdump: verbose output suppressed, use -v or -vv for
full protocol decode
> listening on ed1, link-type EN10MB (Ethernet), capture
size 96 bytes
> 00:20:18:72:8b:72 > ff:ff:ff:ff:ff:ff, ethertype
PPPoE D (0x8863),
> length 32: PPPoE PADI [Host-Uniq 0x402DA4C1]
[Service-Name]
> 00:20:18:72:8b:72 > ff:ff:ff:ff:ff:ff, ethertype
PPPoE D (0x8863),
> length 32: PPPoE PADI [Host-Uniq 0x402DA4C1]
[Service-Name]
>
> It appears that no PADO reply is being received by the
modem;
> the modem shows two packets being transmitted, but non
being received.
> Since the line is marked as up by the modem,
> and since the line comes up properly when the modem is
operating in
> full PPPoE mode, I'm puzzled as to what kind of
mismatch could be
> preventing the ISP end from responding.
> This is a zyxel 642r modem; I can't try my other modem,
a cisco 678,
> because it doesn't support a vci > 63.
>
> The modem is set to use VC-based multiplexing, vpi=0,
vci=100
> These are the parameters used for PPPoE, and I presume
are still
> required as part of the ATM layer when bridging.
>
> I am assuming there should be no need for my ISP to be
notified that I
> am trying to use bridging in the modem, since it should
be transparent
> on their end. They claim not to support bridging, but
I don't see how
> they can say that, other than that they don't want to
deal with the
> support issues. Is this a reasonable assumption?
>
> Nikos Vassiliadis wrote:
>> On Tuesday 23 October 2007 05:31:45 freebsd dreamchaser.org wrote:
>>> I'm attempting to change a DSL link from using
PPPoE in the DSL modem
>>> to doing PPPoE on 6.1, with the modem in
bridging mode.
>>>
>>> I've put the DSL modem in bridging mode, and it
brings up the link
>>> properly -- or at least it reports it as up
(DSL led steady; modem
>>> status report shows it as up, rfc 1483.
>>>
>>> Using user ppp, when I attempt to establish the
PPPoE connection, I
>>> never get very far -- ppp dies when it tries to
acquire carrier. I
>>> don't understand this, as there isn't a carrier
signal to acquire on
>>> an ethernet.
>>
>> There is carrier on ethernet. Ethernet belongs to
the CSMA/DA model
>> where CS means carrier sense.
>>
>>> I tried disabling cd in ppp.conf but as noted
in the doc, it's
>>> required for a PPPoE connection and is forced
on.
>>>
>>> Also, how do I know know which interface it is
attempting to connect to?
>>> The debug log shows it found five interfaces,
but doesn't indicate which
>>> one it is trying to connect to.
>>
>> It tries to use ed1 for PPPoE(set device
PPPoE:ed1)
>> Can you use the minimal configuration labelled
pppoe
>> from /usr/share/examples/ppp/ppp.conf.sample?
>> The only things you have to change are:
>> The ethernet interface it will try PPPoE.
>> username and password.
>>
>> Is your ed1 connected to the modem directly?
>> Or it goes through a switch? Can you try
connecting
>> your ed1 directly on your DSL modem's ethernet
port?
>> You might need a crossover cable to do this(
>> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ethernet_crossover_cable)
>> or not since these days many ethernet ports do
>> this automatically.
>>
>>
>> Please post also ifconfig and run tcpdump on ed1
>> during try.
>>
> ...
>> I dont'see anything wrong, but I may be wrong. The
small
>> sample configuration always worked for me. Why
don't you
>> use it as a starting point?
_______________________________________________
freebsd-questionsfreebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-que
stions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to
"freebsd-questions-unsubscribefreebsd.org"
|
