Olle <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
> I have problems connecting to a Cisco machine.
> I'm using kppp & kinternet with SuSE 9.2.
> My PPP to other machines works OK.
> The only thing I know about the machine(Cisco)is that it is from 1999.
I can only tell you what's happening but not precisely why.
> Log from kppp:
....
> Jan 10 21:31:44 davai pppd[14225]: rcvd [CHAP Success id=0x2 ""]
> Jan 10 21:31:44 davai pppd[14225]: CHAP authentication succeeded
Everything went well up to this point.
> Jan 10 21:31:44 davai pppd[14225]: sent [CCP ConfReq id=0x1 <deflate
> 15> <deflate(old#) 15> <bsd v1 15>]
This is Compression Control Protocol (CCP), used for negotiating
software compression. For Linux it is almost always useless when
the peer uses a commercial PPP implementation since those mostly use
patented CCP algorithms.
> Jan 10 21:31:44 davai pppd[14225]: sent [IPCP ConfReq id=0x1 <compress
> VJ 0f 01> <addr 171.16.1.205>]
This is a request by pppd to use 171.16.1.205 as it's local IP address.
It also includes a request for VJ header compression.
> Jan 10 21:31:44 davai pppd[14225]: rcvd [IPCP ConfReq id=0x1 <addr
> 171.16.1.1>]
This is a request by the peer to use 171.16.1.1 as it's IP address
but without VJ header compression.
> Jan 10 21:31:44 davai pppd[14225]: sent [IPCP ConfAck id=0x1 <addr
> 171.16.1.1>]
> Jan 10 21:31:44 davai pppd[14225]: rcvd [proto=0x8207] 01 01 00 04
This is a request to use Cisco Discovery Protocol (CDP)...
> Jan 10 21:31:44 davai pppd[14225]: Unsupported protocol 0x8207
> received
> Jan 10 21:31:44 davai pppd[14225]: sent [LCP ProtRej id=0x3 82 07 01
> 01 00 04]
....which Linux doesn't support and so it's rejected. I'm not familiar
with CDP.
> Jan 10 21:31:44 davai pppd[14225]: rcvd [LCP ProtRej id=0x4 80 fd 01
> 01 00 0f 1a 04 78 00 18 04 78 00 15 03 2f]
The Cisco rejects CCP entirely, something of no significance.
> Jan 10 21:31:47 davai pppd[14225]: rcvd [IPCP ConfReq id=0x2 <addr
> 171.16.1.1>]
> Jan 10 21:31:47 davai pppd[14225]: sent [IPCP ConfAck id=0x2 <addr
> 171.16.1.1>]
Pppd receives a receives a second request for the IP address and agrees
to allow the peer to use it. A lot of useless back and forth follows.
....
> Jan 10 21:31:53 davai pppd[14225]: rcvd [IPCP ConfRej id=0x1 <compress
> VJ 0f 01> <addr 171.16.1.205>]
At this point the peer rejects both pppd IPCP options, the VJ header
compression and the IP address. This is eventually fatal.
> Jan 10 21:31:53 davai pppd[14225]: sent [IPCP ConfReq id=0x2 <addrs
> 171.16.1.205 171.16.1.1>]
Here pppd falls back to the old IP addresses IPCP (addrs), almost always
useless. A lot of similar back and forth follows.
....
> Jan 10 21:32:17 davai pppd[14225]: sent [IPCP ConfReq id=0x2 <addrs
> 171.16.1.205 171.16.1.1>]
> Jan 10 21:32:17 davai pppd[14225]: rcvd [IPCP ConfRej id=0x2 <addrs
> 171.16.1.205 171.16.1.1>]
Here the peer rejects both IP addresses in the IP addresses option.
> Jan 10 21:32:17 davai pppd[14225]: sent [IPCP ConfReq id=0x3 <addrs
> 171.16.1.205 171.16.1.1>]
> Jan 10 21:32:26 davai pppd[14225]: rcvd [IPCP ConfRej id=0x2 <addrs
> 171.16.1.205 171.16.1.1>]
> Jan 10 21:32:26 davai pppd[14225]: sent [IPCP ConfReq id=0x3 <addrs
> 171.16.1.205 171.16.1.1>]
> Jan 10 21:32:29 davai pppd[14225]: sent [IPCP ConfReq id=0x3 <addrs
> 171.16.1.205 171.16.1.1>]
> Jan 10 21:32:30 davai pppd[14225]: Terminating on signal 15.
> Jan 10 21:32:30 davai pppd[14225]: sent [LCP TermReq id=0x7 "User
> request"]
Pppd finally throws in the towel, requesting termination of negotiation.
> Jan 10 21:32:32 davai pppd[14225]: sent [LCP TermReq id=0x8 "User
> request"]
> Jan 10 21:32:34 davai pppd[14225]: rcvd [IPCP ConfRej id=0x2 <addrs
> 171.16.1.205 171.16.1.1>]
> Jan 10 21:32:34 davai pppd[14225]: Discarded non-LCP packet when LCP
> not open
> Jan 10 21:32:34 davai pppd[14225]: Connection terminated.
> Jan 10 21:32:34 davai pppd[14225]: Exit.
I'd guess the Cisco PPP implementation doesn't support the VJ option
at all. The Cisco also might be configured to prevent a remote PPP host
from using an IP address on the Cisco LAN.
You could try the pppd novj option but I'd say there's a only slim
chance that it alone will help.
There also may be a slim chance that assigning a local IP address
to pppd that is not in the subnet of the Cisco LAN would allow PPP
negotiation to complete, e.g., 192.168.0.1. If they complete then
the Cisco and pppd host should be able to communicate.
--
Clifford Kite Email: "echo
xvgr_yvahk-(E-Mail Removed)|rot13"
PPP-Q&A links, downloads:
http://ckite.no-ip.net/
/* I hear and I forget. I see and I remember. I do and I understand.
--Confucius, 551-479 BC */