Hey~

I'm a complete newbie to Slackware (as is apparent from the nature of this question), and don't know how to configure my dsl. I guess I was too used to Redhat thinking for me...

Anyway, I don't really understand the requirements for a script I might write to get this working, so if somebody could give me instructions, or a link to instructions, it would be really great.

Thanks in advance for your help!

~Andrew

You didn't provide any info on the type of DSL you have but for some types, like cable internet, they use dhcp servers for dynamic IP assignment. All that I have seen use an standard ethernet interface on the computer. It needs kernel or kernel module support to function. If you know that the NIC is working then you might try using "dhcpcd eth0", substitute the proper ethernet adapter for eth0. If not then you could try using the "netconfig" script to locate it and load a module. It should also config /etc/rc.d/rc.inet1 for a dhcp server assignment. If you use the later option, it would probably be the easiest to just reboot and allow the scripts to run. It is a more complicated if you have two NIC's installed. One for local network and one for the internet. It would be best if you posted back some hardware info and some DSL service info. Like do you use a router or just a bridge device for your service.

When I had slackware installed. (Had - old computer) I used RP-pppoe to set up my DSL with Sympatico.ca (Standard High Speed Internet Package). You can find Raging Penguin pppoe at freshmeat.net. Real easy to set up. Then all you have to do is edit you .rc files so that it connects on startup (unless you want to type ADSL-Start/Stop all the time).

Okay, thanks. I'll give it a shot today when I gt home!

i think rp will work out fine, but i found out that slack didn't detect my ethernet card correctly

it is an ADMtek 983

i can't find drivers for it anywhere, got any tips?

thanks a lot,
andrew

I think I have seen that NIC chip before and I thought it used a tulip driver. What kernel and/or Slack version are you running? If your kernel is older than 2.4.18 then you probably need a kernel upgrade.

If you are using modules and have the tulip.o module built then try, "modprobe tulip"? You see the modules available under /lib/modules/2.4.18/kernel/drivers/net. Substitute your kernel version number in the path. Look to see if there is a tulip directory with the tulip driver located there. Use the "dmesg" command to see if it detected a NIC and assigned eth0 at the end of the listing.

If running a custom kernel then either enable and build the module or include the support in the kernel build. I believe it is listed as DECchip Tulip in the kernel menu under Ethernet 10/100 devices.

Ok~

I just changed houses, so I will be alienated from my slack-machine for a week or so, but in advance, could you give me a tutorial on installing drivers on slack. I messed around with it a little right before I left, but I pretty much have know idea what I'm doing.

Update:

I used tulip.o and it looks like my ethernet card has been properly detected. I aliased eth0, and the output of "ifconfig eth0" looks normal.

After configuring roaring penguin, the "adsl-start" command times out. Is there any possibility that my card was not detected correctly after all? Is there any way that I can test to see if it is correct?

Thanks,
Andrew

I am sort of a newbie at this also but try typing 'lsmod' and see what is displayed. If it shows your NIC then I think it's worknig just fine and the prob is in your config of something else. Are you using DHCP contact your ISP if your not sure they should e able to tell you how it was installed.

On modules, generally if the modules load and produces no errors then it is loaded correctly. Even better when the module inserts messages stating what it found and used. In your case if it detected the NIC and assigned eth0 then it should be correct. If you know that rp-pppoe should work, like from the prior install, then it is probably a config issue with the rp-pppoe software. I only attempted to tuse it one time on my system with COVAD, but since my service is using a router, I do not think it was forwarding the pppoe request out on the DSL. It was just local network request and it didn't work. So that was my only attempt tot use it. What kind of interface equipment does your DSL service use? A plain bridge device or a router device?

oops:

I just realized that the roaring penguin configuration mentions nothing of the default gateway or dhcp server, which makes me suspect that I have missed out on something big. Do I have to add this information to the route of eth0 ? If so, how?

Thanks for ur help,
Andrew

If the PPPoE was successfull it should be handled by the program. Now, it might not handle DNS server assignment for name resolution. That file would be /etc/resolv.conf if you wish to set assignments manually. But if was successfull then you should be able to do a simple ping to an IP address and receive a response. The ifconfig program would display an IP address on eth0 that was assigned. And the "route -n" would include a default gateway assignment on eth0. But if you are receiving time out messages then it is sending a request with the info provided but it is not receiving any response. If your connection device is a router then I would think it is not going to work. I had that problem. But if the device is just a simple bridge device then the packets should be sent out the DSL without any problems. In that case it may be a config issue or a compatibility problem.

ok:

I issued the command

route add -host 4.64.248.1 dev eth0

(where 4.64.248.1 is the default gateway)

and it says that eth0 is not recognized. When I use 'ifconfig' it shows only lo , but when i use 'ifconfig eth0' i get eth0 and it looks quite normal.

i am trying to connect throughwhat my isp calls a 'dsl modem', but i think is what you mean when you say bridge (b/c it sure isn't a router).


what is going on here??

thanks,
andrew

Yes, I would agree that it is probably just a bridge device. ISP's often use the term modem for a bridge device. In that case the PPPoE requests should be sent out without any hinderance. The ifconfig results are because the eth0 device has not been configured, but it is a valid device that is available. Compare against say "ifconfig eth5", that will display an error message. But when you say it appears quite normal, I would not think it has an IP address, netmask, broadcast, etc. if it is not displayed by the ifconfig. I think you are still at the point of PPPoE time out requests and that is not working. However, the command for adding a default gateway would be:

route add default gw 4.64.248.1 netmask 0.0.0.0 metric 1

But it is not going to be able to work until the eth0 is configured with a valid IP address to establish the network route entry for the gateway to be used. I still think the operation would be completed by rp-pppoe just like it would for the pppd daemon on a dialup connection. Your DNS server assignments in /etc/resolv.conf will probably be manual config. And even if you configured an IP address (stolen), it would probably not make it past the gateway because the routing hasn't been enabled by authentication using PPPoE.

From your original post, I think you had Redhat working with your DSL, and it had to use PPPoE as well. You might also search and find out what it used before. You know that will work. Perhaps Redhat uses rp-pppoe, but I wouldn't know since I have never used Redhat. I think I remember that rp-pppoe has a script that you run and it asks the questions and you just fill in the blanks. After that it should work. I think it was adsl-setup or something like that. I also seem to recall reading some documentation that comes with the package as well. Perhaps you have read them already. But it uses the pppd daemon and that also requires special config but most is done by the setup script. I think CHAP authentication requires manual setup from what I read. (/etc/ppp/chap-secrets)

I did a site search here on LQ on "rp-pppoe" and turned up many pages of prior threads regarding the use. The config would not be Slack specific but more DSL provider specific. I also googled "rp-pppoe" and it turned up many different sites that could possibly provide more info on the configuration of rp-pppoe for different DSL providers. But one site was a user forum, like here at LQ. http://www.voy.com/41165/ Perhaps you might locate some specific info regarding your DSL provider just looking through the board. You may have already "been there and done that."

Sorry, I can't be of more help. But I have only had a need to use rp-pppoe one time for my own DSL service and after three hours of failures, I gave up and just switched to a static subnet for an additional $10/month. I messed around with COVAD's first config for two weeks trying to get the static IP assigned to my server instead of the router (using port forwarding for host services). I had the static subnet setup and running perfectly in five minutes. The only reason it took that long was I verified all the numbers twice. The router still does the PPPoE authentication but it enables the static subnet and routes to their gateway. My server is configured for it's own static IP address and routes to the router as the gateway.

Good luck.

FYI:

PPPoE is what it is, PPP over Ethernet. This means your eth0 won't have any TCP/IP settings because it talks to the DSL device using ppp which activates a PPP device (ppp0) that has the actual TCP/IP settings. I found that out the hard way. The trick is to not think of your ethernet card as a network adapter but as just a device that activates a virtual PPP adapter (similar to how a dialup modem works, there is no modem0 and ppp0 is a virtual device.)

And if you wanted to know what all the devices were.. Technically a modem is a device that modulates and de-modulates an analog signal and DSL doesn't do that. PPPoE DSL devices aren't routers at all, they transmit point to point protocol and TCP/IP is carried inside of PPP. Most non PPPoE DSL devices actually are routers even though they aren't usually set up as full routers but are rather routers in bridge mode.