Profile Details

Toggle Sidebar
Recent updates
  • Hi Dani, did you find a way to get this ethernet controller working?

  • Hi Dani, did you find a way to get this ethernet controller working?

  • In the working situation with a switch in between I have this:

    content of ifcfg-enp4s0:

    DEVICE=enp4s0
    BOOTPROTO="none"
    ONBOOT="no"


    content of ifcfg-ppp0:
    DEVICE=ppp0
    TYPE="xDSL"
    USERCTL="no"
    BOOTPROTO="dialup"
    NAME="DSLppp0"
    ONBOOT="yes"
    PIDFILE="/var/run/pppoe-ppp0.pid"
    FIREWALL="NONE"
    PING="."
    PPPOE_TIMEOUT="80"
    LCP_FAILURE="5"
    LCP_INTERVAL="20"
    CLAMPMSS="1412"
    CONNECT_POLL="6"
    CONNECT_TIMEOUT="80"
    DEFROUTE="yes"
    SYNCHRONOUS="no"
    ETH="enp4s0"
    PROVIDER="DSLppp0"
    PEERDNS="no"
    USER="(remover mac)@internet"
    LINUX_PLUGIN="/usr/lib64/pppd/2.4.5/rp-pppoe.so"
    MTU="1508"



    Then I can configure it without the switch in two order, do I use one there is a file ifcfg-enp4s0 the other tis file doesn't exists.
    content of ifcfg-enp4s0:
    DEVICE=enp4s0
    BOOTPROTO="none"
    ONBOOT="no"


    content of ifcfg-enp4s0.6:
    DEVICE=enp4s0.6
    TYPE="VLAN"
    ONBOOT="yes"
    USERCTL="no"
    BOOTPROTO="dhcp"
    PEERDNS="no"
    VLAN="yes"


    content of ifcfg-ppp0:
    DEVICE=ppp0
    TYPE="xDSL"
    USERCTL="no"
    BOOTPROTO="dialup"
    NAME="DSLppp0"
    ONBOOT="yes"
    PIDFILE="/var/run/pppoe-ppp0.pid"
    FIREWALL="NONE"
    PING="."
    PPPOE_TIMEOUT="80"
    LCP_FAILURE="5"
    LCP_INTERVAL="20"
    CLAMPMSS="1412"
    CONNECT_POLL="6"
    CONNECT_TIMEOUT="80"
    DEFROUTE="yes"
    SYNCHRONOUS="no"
    ETH="enp4s0"
    PROVIDER="DSLppp0"
    PEERDNS="no"
    USER="(remover mac)@internet"
    LINUX_PLUGIN="/usr/lib64/pppd/2.4.5/rp-pppoe.so"
    MTU="1508"


    When ifcfg-enp4s0 exists ifcfg-ppp0 is has ETH="enp4s0" if it doesn't ETH="enp4s0.6"

  • I found a solution that works as this is not the preferred one.

    When I connect a managed switch in between the NTU and ClearOS with a configuration that bridges VLAN6 tagged from one port to VLAN6 untagged on a other I can connect. On the VLAN6 tagged port is the NTU on the untagged ClearOS.

    What I see when I also have VLAN1 on the same port as the one the NTU is connected to, so VLAN1 and VLAN6 tagged. It is not possible to connect. It will connect but immediately disconnect.

    So what I think what happens is that when I configure VLAN6 on ClearOS it is not tagged right or there is also a other VLAN that still exist on the same WAN interface most likely VLAN1 as this triggers the disconnect from my ISP. When with the managed switch I also put for example VLAN4 and VLAN7 tagged on the same port as VLAN6 tagged there is no issue.

    So the question is how do I make sure I only have a well tagged VLAN6 on my WAN adapter?

  • Thanks for your reply Nick,

    I'm still stuck having this in my log files:

    Jan 14 07:38:17 gateway pppd[7988]: Using interface ppp0
    Jan 14 07:38:17 gateway pppd[7988]: Connect: ppp0 <--> /dev/pts/1
    Jan 14 07:38:17 gateway pppoe[7989]: PPP session is 59734 (0xe956)
    Jan 14 07:38:18 gateway pppd[7988]: Remote message: Authentication success,Welcome!
    Jan 14 07:38:18 gateway pppd[7988]: PAP authentication succeeded
    Jan 14 07:38:18 gateway pppd[7988]: Unsupported protocol 'IPv6 Control Protocol' (0x8057) received
    Jan 14 07:38:18 gateway pppd[7988]: local IP address 81.205.120.246
    Jan 14 07:38:18 gateway pppd[7988]: remote IP address 195.190.228.145
    Jan 14 07:38:18 gateway pppd[7988]: LCP terminated by peer
    Jan 14 07:38:18 gateway pppd[7988]: Connect time 0.0 minutes.
    Jan 14 07:38:18 gateway pppd[7988]: Sent 0 bytes, received 0 bytes.
    Jan 14 07:38:18 gateway pppoe[7989]: Session 59734 terminated -- received PADT from peer
    Jan 14 07:38:18 gateway pppoe[7989]: Sent PADT
    Jan 14 07:38:18 gateway pppd[7988]: Modem hangup
    Jan 14 07:38:18 gateway pppd[7988]: Connection terminated.


    I get the feeling that my ISP is closing the session as my system doesn't accept IPV6. If you look at the sequence it is like this.
    Authentication - PAP authentication succeeded
    System can't handle IPV6 - Unsupported protocol 'IPv6 Control Protocol' (0x8057) received
    System gets IPV4 - local IP address 81.205.***.***
    I don't understand this - remote IP address 195.190.228.145
    ISP is terminating - LCP terminated by peer
    Session terminited as
    is recieved from ISP - PADTSession 59734 terminated -- received PADT from peer
    Systems sends PADT and
    does not accept any data
    from this point - Sent PADT

    Can it be the ISP is terminating the session as the offered IPV6 is not accepted?

  • Problems connecting PPPoE in a multi WAN system

    I'm currently running into a problem after switching from DSL with modem to a fiber connection without modem. ClearOS is connected directly to the NT box (Fiber to Cat interface)

    What I did so far:
    Used a un-configured NIC and added a VLAN on it. - Role External - Type DHCP - VLAN ID 6
    Then eddited the VLAN addapter to PPPoE - Role External - Connection type PPPoE - Username (mac@internet) - Password (provided by ISP) -MTU 1500
    After update the VLAN addapter is gone and settings in ifcfg-enp4s0.6 changed and ifcfg-ppp0 is created.
    At this point there is no connection. I found this topic and added a additional VLAN Same as first time, this corrected the file ifcfg-enp4s0.6. At this point no connection at all.

    Then I started over with the information i found here, Changed Iface.php and added a firewall rule as described.

    From there I removed everything and started over again. Now I have a very unstable connection. With this in the logfile messages:


    Jan 12 15:53:48 gateway pppoe-connect: PPPoE connection lost; attempting re-connection.
    Jan 12 15:53:53 gateway pppd[14578]: Plugin /usr/lib64/pppd/2.4.5/rp-pppoe.so loaded.
    Jan 12 15:53:53 gateway pppd[14578]: RP-PPPoE plugin version 3.8p compiled against pppd 2.4.5
    Jan 12 15:53:53 gateway pppd[14578]: pppd 2.4.5 started by root, uid 0
    Jan 12 15:53:53 gateway systemd-sysctl: Line is not an assignment in file '/etc/sysctl.d/99-sysctl.conf': (null)
    Jan 12 15:53:53 gateway pppd[14578]: PPP session is 25606
    Jan 12 15:53:53 gateway systemd-sysctl: Line is not an assignment in file '/etc/sysctl.conf': (null)
    Jan 12 15:53:53 gateway pppd[14578]: Connected to 00:00:00:10:2f:30 via interface enp4s0.6
    Jan 12 15:53:53 gateway pppd[14578]: Using interface ppp0
    Jan 12 15:53:53 gateway pppd[14578]: Connect: ppp0 <--> enp4s0.6
    Jan 12 15:53:53 gateway pppd[14578]: Remote message: Authentication success,Welcome!
    Jan 12 15:53:53 gateway pppd[14578]: PAP authentication succeeded
    Jan 12 15:53:53 gateway pppd[14578]: peer from calling number 00:00:00:10:2F:30 authorized
    Jan 12 15:53:53 gateway pppd[14578]: Unsupported protocol 'IPv6 Control Protocol' (0x8057) received
    Jan 12 15:53:53 gateway pppd[14578]: local IP address 81.205.120.xx
    Jan 12 15:53:53 gateway pppd[14578]: remote IP address 195.190.228.xx
    Jan 12 15:53:53 gateway pppd[14578]: LCP terminated by peer
    Jan 12 15:53:53 gateway pppd[14578]: Connect time 0.0 minutes.
    Jan 12 15:53:53 gateway pppd[14578]: Sent 0 bytes, received 0 bytes.
    Jan 12 15:53:53 gateway pppd[14578]: Modem hangup
    Jan 12 15:53:53 gateway pppd[14578]: Connection terminated.
    Jan 12 15:53:53 gateway pppd[14578]: Failed to disconnect PPPoE socket: 114 Operation already in progress
    Jan 12 15:53:54 gateway systemd: firewall.service: main process exited, code=killed, status=15/TERM
    Jan 12 15:53:54 gateway systemd: Unit firewall.service entered failed state.
    Jan 12 15:53:54 gateway systemd: firewall.service failed.
    Jan 12 15:53:57 gateway clearsyncd[1441]: System Events: Socket hang-up: 30
    Jan 12 15:53:58 gateway pppd[14578]: Exit.


    This keeps repeating its self. Is there anyone who can help to diagnose this and find a solution. It also looks as if my firewall stopped working.

  • Albert39
    Albert39 likes the reply for the discussion, Re: DHCP app show up slowly

    It is silly to have the choice, but have you made sure all external interfaces have "Automatic DNS Servers" unchecked? Really this setting should live at a higher level.

  • Albert39
    Albert39 replied to a discussion, DHCP app show up slowly

    Well not so silly, my static WAN has no setting for "Automatic DNS Servers" but the dynamic WAN has and it was checked. I have now unchecked it. Can that be the cause?

  • Albert39
    Albert39 likes the reply for the discussion, Re: DHCP app show up slowly

    Are you using the AD Connector? If not, then resolv.conf should not look like that. It should look like mine:

    There should be another file, /etc/resolv-peerdns.conf, which looks like:
    I don't know where the search domain comes from in this case as it is upstream of me. It is important to have:as your first resolver or local DNS resolution does not work for the server as you see.

    There is an update for the AD connector environment which is going to come out fairly soon, I think, which will bring it into line with the above set up. In the meanwhile I suggest you add the loopback IP as your first resolver.

    [edit]
    I didn't mean nick.conf but you can add the file and it will do as I intended. It is my own file. Otherwise you can create any other file you want in that folder or edit /etc/dnsmasq.conf and change that, but to be honest it is probably not your issue so not worth the effort.
    [/edit]

  • Albert39
    Albert39 likes the reply for the discussion, Re: DHCP app show up slowly

    What do you mean by "50 IP address assigned to a Mac"? How long is your lease time?

    The program can't be reading that man files. The dhcp configuration (/etc/dnsmasq.d/dhcp.conf), leases (/var/lib/dnsmasq/dnsmasq.leases), the hosts file, or at least is doing a reverse DNS lookup), /etc/ethers for the static leases. I wonder if it is a DNS issue. What happens if you put:in /etc/dnsmasq.d/nick.conf then restart dnsmasq. It will stop any unknown local queries leaking out - but I'm not sure why they would on a reverse DNS lookup.