I don't know much about MS's incorrect implementation of CHAP if there is
such a thing (probably - they seem to do EVERYTHING wrong).. Livingston goes
by the specs.. perhaps other NAS vendors spend much more time and code
bloating adding M$ specific parts to it which is what M$ wants - control of
the market and implementation of things. I don't.
On Thu, Jan 22, 1998 at 05:42:02PM -0500, ml-portmaster-users@catnap.net wrote:
> I've just recently installed a PM3 which has both PAP and CHAP
> authentication enabled. If a Windows 95 user attempts to connect
> and has the "use encrypted password" option enabled (to force CHAP),
> the PM3 terminates the call with the debug message "Couldn't CHAP
> on port S0 - Not allowed". They get in fine if they disable
> the encrypted password option (i.e. use only PAP). They can
> get in with CHAP if I disable PAP on the PM3.
>
> Livingston support (ref#E103500) tells me that this is due to
> Microsoft's incorrect implementation of the PPP specs. Other
> modem servers can handle this though, so perhaps ComOS is
> just being too picky.
>
> How do other PM3 owners get around this? Do you tell Win95 users
> to not use CHAP, or do you disable PAP and force them to do CHAP?
> Neither sounds like a good solution.
>
> Chris Martin
> Catnap Consultants
> -
> To unsubscribe, email 'majordomo@livingston.com' with
> 'unsubscribe portmaster-users' in the body of the message.
-- - Steve - Systems Manager - Community Internet Access, Inc. - Gallup and Grants, New Mexico - To unsubscribe, email 'majordomo@livingston.com' with 'unsubscribe portmaster-users' in the body of the message.