From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Date: Mon, 14 Aug 1995 22:43:48 -0400 From: presotto@plan9.att.com presotto@plan9.att.com Subject: pppclient Topicbox-Message-UUID: 1637a410-eac8-11e9-9e20-41e7f4b1d025 Message-ID: <19950815024348.94whvzZbGaPByfxoiElCsTOo3yWuz4h7_GW0B2IjKeU@z> I agree, we wrote a different version for brazil. Unfortunately, they share no code except for the tcp compression. This one went out with the release in the hope that a plan 9 version would be useful to someone. It has worked talking to xylogics annex boxes. ------ original message follows ------ >>From cse.psu.edu!9fans-outgoing-owner Mon Aug 14 22:42:30 EDT 1995 Received: by psuvax1.cse.psu.edu id <34220>; Mon, 14 Aug 1995 22:09:40 -0400 Received: from plan9.cs.su.oz.au ([129.78.96.2]) by psuvax1.cse.psu.edu with SMTP id <34230>; Mon, 14 Aug 1995 20:52:06 -0400 From: Boyd Roberts Date: Mon, 14 Aug 1995 19:27:36 -0400 To: 9fans@cse.psu.edu Subject: re: pppclient In-Reply-To: <199508140955.518.9.babip@plan9.cs.su.oz.au> Message-ID: <199508150927.1656.9.babis@plan9.cs.su.oz.au> Sender: owner-9fans@cse.psu.edu Precedence: bulk Reply-To: 9fans@cse.psu.edu Looking further into the IPCP code I see that its not likely to converge when negociating with my server. The configuration request/nak/reject code is just wrong. I'm not going to try and fix it any further. It just doesn't hold enough state to ensure the negociation will converge; it's nearly stateless, but not quite.