IPoE Centos

[Dmitry]

you are responsible to test it
furthermore, unsuccessful combination of kernel/drivers/hardware is major point of failures
btw, why you use 1.9 ? i'd advice to use 1.10.x or take sources from git
ipv6 is supported, but only in shared=0 mode (vlan-per-user)

[manyax]

That's very cool
Am I doing something wrong or I didn't understand it correctly. Will vlan_mon bring up vlan interfaces ? Or you need to do it manually.
[ipoe]
vlan-mon=eth1.1441,2-200
interface=re:eth1.1441\.

[Dmitry]

vlan-mon will bring, why we need it then
did you build and load vlan_mon kernel module ?

[manyax]

yes I did .. so it should bring up the vlan

[manyax]

Ok .. vlan-mon needed to be specified in [modules]

[manyax]

I don't understand how ipoe with shared=0 is working. It's not creating a ptp interface. I think my question is .. Is it a problem to use the same gateway ip for the client?
ex
client 1 ip 17.16.0.1/32 gw 10.0.0.1 on router eth1.70 inet addr:10.0.0.1 Bcast:0.0.0.0 Mask:255.255.255.255
client 2 ip 17.16.0.2/32 gw 10.0.0.1 eth1.108 inet addr:10.0.0.1 Bcast:0.0.0.0 Mask:255.255.255.255

[Dmitry]

no, it is fine to use single gateway ip
what ptp interface do you mean ?
what accel-ppp doing in shared=0 mode is: add route on interface and optionally assign ip on interface
interfaces are bringing up/down by vlan_mon
if something is going wrong please show logs and config

[manyax]

It seems to be a problem with some dhcp clients.
On a HP1910, if I issue 192.168.250.67/32 and gw 10.0.10.1 for vlan 67. The vlan comes up, auth with radius succeeded but the client refuses the ip address. Only works If I issue 192.168.250.67/24 gw 192.168.250.1.

Code: Select all

[ipoe]
verbose=1
username=ifname
lease-time=600
renew-time=600
max-lease-time=3600
unit-cache=1000
shared=0
ifcfg=1
mode=L2
proto=100
attr-dhcp-router-ip=DHCP-Router-IP-Address
attr-dhcp-mask=DHCP-Mask
vlan-mon=eth5,2-100
vlan-timeout=30
interface=re:eth5\.

[2016-07-04 09:08:52]: debug: vlan-mon: notify 7 67 0800 0
[2016-07-04 09:08:52]: info: ipoe: create vlan eth5.67 parent eth5
[2016-07-04 09:08:52]: info: ipoe: start interface eth5.67 ()
[2016-07-04 09:08:54]: info: eth5.67: recv [DHCPv4 Discover xid=aa411ec9 chaddr=5c:8a:38:d6:e0:fe <Message-Type Discover> <Host-Name TEST-CORE-2> <Request-List Subnet,Classless-Route,Router,DNS,Domain-Name,Route,Vendor-Specific> <Max-Message-Size 1152> <Vendor-Class 48502e20485020313931302d382d506f452b20283635572920537769746368> <Client-ID 00356338612e333864362e653066652d566c616e2d696e746572666163653637>]
....
[2016-07-04 09:08:54]: info: eth5.67: eth5.67: authentication succeeded
[2016-07-04 09:08:54]: info: eth5.67: send [DHCPv4 Offer xid=aa411ec9 yiaddr=192.168.250.67 chaddr=5c:8a:38:d6:e0:fe <Message-Type Offer> <Server-ID 10.0.10.1> <Lease-Time 600> <T1 600> <Router 10.0.10.1> <Subnet 255.255.255.255> <DNS 8.8.8.8,8.8.4.4>]
.....
[2016-07-04 09:09:33]: info: eth5.67: ipoe: session timed out
[2016-07-04 09:09:33]: debug: eth5.67: terminate
[2016-07-04 09:09:33]: info: eth5.67: ipoe: session finished
[2016-07-04 09:10:03]: info: ipoe: stop interface eth5.67
[2016-07-04 09:10:03]: info: ipoe: remove vlan eth5.67

[Dmitry]

don't use /32 mask, it doesn't make any sense, just makes incompatibility problems on cheap routers
use /24 or even wider masks in conjunction with proxy-arp

[manyax]

Will this be ok? Since I want to separate the clients?