Thank you very much for a detailed reply. On 22 May 2012 20:24, James Carlson <carlsonj@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > Note just how terribly invalid that reply from the peer really is. He's > sending us a Configure-Nak, but every single "hint" value exactly > matches what we sent in our Configure-Request. That's just beyond the > pale; if what you're "negatively acknowledging" exactly matches what the > peer is asking, you really should have just acknowledged it, right? Yes, I agree, I also thought this was very strange behavior. > > My guess (and it's just a guess at this point) is that this "huawei" > thing is one of those horrible 3G access devices that mangles PPP. The > 3G "standard" specifies that the access server must lie to the client > and return success during the authentication phase, even if the user > name and/or password are completely wrong, or if the named user does not > have the requested network service authorization. The only way you find > out that something is wrong under this "standard" is when you ask for an > IP address and the peer is unable to supply one. Yes, it is a 3g modem and its exact behavior is of course company secret and undocumented. However, I dont think the configuration of the modem is the problem, as I have tried the same type of modem with other ISPs and it works. > Most likely, your PAP user name "nne5" or password is incorrect or you > don't have the right configuration set up in the chat script. I suspect authentication, as the same modem works for other ISPs with the same chatscript. Thank you very much for pointing me in this direction. -Kristian -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-ppp" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
