PCI ADSL modem driver problems
 

Lo Everyone

I have a small LAN in my (student) house which has, until now, been connected to the big wide world via windows internet connection sharing and a dial up modem.

I've taken the plunge and invested in ADSL, more specifically a Dynamode Conexant PCI ADSL modem.

I would like to go the whole hog and convert an old machine into a linux server, probably running a web server, ftp, some sort of file sharing with windows computers (samba?), a hefty firewall and, critically, sharing the adsl connection. All these things I think I can puzzle out...except getting the modem to work in linux.

I've got RedHat installed at the moment, but have no objections to switching distributions in order to get the modem working (although I've heard RedHat or Mandrake are most suitable for newbies).

As you may have guessed, I'm a linux virgin, so please try not to use language too technical.

If anyone has a RedHat Package manager file that will solve all my problems, you would make me a very happy man :o) Even if not, any and all help would be appreciated.

Cheers

http://www.data-technics.net/content.php?cat=7

Always check google... which oddly enough led me to LQ, weird huh?

You're lucky, PCI DSL modems are rarely ever supported devices. Its much simpler to go with an external and an ethernet card.

Cheers,

Finegan

yep - I found that one as well. Followed the instructions as they are (and varied the order, in an attempt to make things better & get fewer error messages).

No Joy - grrrrr.

Everything installs ok & I can edit all the files I need to with vi. When I restart my machine, It starts cnxadsl (my adsl modem), it tries to connect to provider (and succeeds after 10-30 attempts). It then proceeds to hang the boot
a short time after (when starting sendmail or something around it in the boot sequence).

Quite annoying, n'est-ce pas? To be so close...

I'm trying the process recommended for 'Red Hat-like systems' on the same site now. My hopes are not high for it. I'm guessing I'll just be doing the by hand the same as the rpms do automatically.

Any thoughts?

Not really, register at their site, ask on their forums, this thing is a special odd little 2rd party driver that creates its own binary to configure things... its quite odd.

If its a possibility, honestly, you might want to try and chuck the modem, PCI modems are horrible, and a bad idea in general, a normal external modem connected via ethernet is a much simpler solution usually, if its possible and you're not trapped in provider lock in...

Luck,

Finegan

PCI ADSL
 

I have had experience with PCI ADSL modems. The Speedstream 3660 to be exact. They are just a NIC and a modem on one card. Have you tried looking at the chips themselves and trying to find a compatible driver for the NIC? I haven't used them in a Linux install but I thought it might give you a direction to try. The modem to NIC functios are in the firmware and it just might work. Sorry I can't be of more help, good luck.

Hmmm. Could well be worth a try.

So conexant is modem chipset... I'll have a look on the card for the NIC chip.

I've found some more 'get conexant working' stuff, so I'll give that a go too.

If I get anything to work, I'm going to host a proper Janet & John version. If I can make someone else's life a bit easier....

1st I have to make it work tho. :study: back to the books

I've got one of these and it worked after a little messing around.

You say that it connects after lots of attempts. What is listed in /etc/Conexant/cnxadsl.conf for you VPI and VCI - are these correct? After you have run "cnxadsl start" (or whatever your scipt is called, I renamed mine can't remember the proper name) does everything appear to load OK? What details are in /proc/net/atm/CnxAdsl:0 ?

cheers

Jamie...

VPI & VCI are same as default, so they are ok.

I'll check the one you suggested, & see what happens. Will take a while tho - have to switch card from one pc to another :o)

If the status file in /proc/... says its connected then it suggests that the problem lies with your pppd as there are two distinct connection levels. You need your ATM connection first, then your PPP connection over the ATM (hence the name PPPoA). If you can work out which bit if failing then it should help diagnose things quite a bit!

cheers

Jamie...

Here is the /proc/net/atm/CnxAdsl:0 file:

Conexant AccessRunner PCI ADSL Modem Adapter Status
----------------------------------

ADSL Line Connected

Line Rates: Receive 576 kbps Transmit 288 kbps

ADSL Modulation:G.DMT, Rate Unlimited / Full Rate

ATM Virtual Channel IDs: no connections open

Physical Layer Stats: Receive Transmit
Noise Margin 38.21/ 38.06: 111 127.99/127.99: 0
Attenuation 27.02 17.00
Power -38

ATM Link Stats: Receive Transmit
Bytes 0 53
Cells 0 1
Management Cells 0 1
CLP=0 Cells 0 0
CLP=1 Cells 0 1
HEC Errors 0
Alignment Errors 0
Unroutable Cells 0

AAL Link Stats: Receive Transmit
Good Bytes 0 0
Good Frames 0 0
Discarded Bytes 0
Discarded Frames 0
CRC Errors 0
Invalid Length Errors 0
Timeout Errors 0

Driver version - 6.1.2.007 (09102001)
EE PROM Mac Address 00.01.e1.05.2e.0e

I guess that would indicate that ATM is working, but not pppd. My computer still freezes after a minute or two of starting cnxadslctl, or if i try to start it during the boot (I have to skip it with interactive start up to even get my computer started).

What is a virtual channel (similar to virtual circuit?)? I seem to be getting no response to my 53 bytes (is that a synchronisation word?)

What is an AAL link?

I've got in contact with Dynamode (they produce my modem) and their R&D dept. is now testing conexant's linux driver that they have developed. They're going to get back to me when they have some more news. Perhaps they are going to fully support linux (or at least a kernel or two) soon. Probably I'll never here from them again though ;o(

Anyway....Any ideas of what is happening?

Could the fact that I am acheiving ATM support through a module be a problem? Would it be better to recompile my kernel to include ATM & PPPoA support?

Or am I getting the wrong idea about this entirely?