02-05-2007 04:11 AM
Hello,
I am trying to use a cisco as a pppoe server. The problem is that its not able to connect mor e than 5 users at a time. I thought the cisco(3620) had some problems and used another (2610) with the same result. What could be the problem?
TIA
Shekhar Basnet
Here are some info.
System image file is "flash:c2600-ik9o3s-mz.122-31"
cisco 2610 (MPC860) processor (revision 0x203) with 61440K/4096K bytes of memory
32K bytes of non-volatile configuration memory.
16384K bytes of processor board System flash (Read/Write)
PPPoE# sho run
Building configuration...
!
ip audit notify log
ip audit po max-events 100
vpdn enable
!
vpdn-group canopy-consumer
accept-dialin
protocol pppoe
virtual-template 10
pppoe limit per-vlan 300
!
interface FastEthernet1/0.630
description #### PPPoE clients #####
encapsulation dot1Q 630
pppoe enable
!
interface Virtual-Template10
ip address 192.168.125.125 255.255.255.252
peer default ip address pool consumer-pool
ppp authentication pap
!
ip local pool consumer-pool x.x.254.112 x.x.254.119
Here's a sample log when trying to connect using a 6th customer
Feb 5 16:49:53: PPPoE 0: I PADI L:ffff.ffff.ffff R:000a.e44f.ba27 630 Fa1/0.630
Feb 5 16:49:53: PPPoE 0: O PADO L:f730.8100.0276 R:ba27.0003.e3e8 630 Fa1/0.630
Feb 5 16:49:53: PPPoE 0: I PADR L:0003.e3e8.f730 R:000a.e44f.ba27 630 Fa1/0.630
Feb 5 16:49:53: PPPoE 396: Creating
Feb 5 16:49:53: PPPoE 396: Created L:0003.e3e8.f730 R:000a.e44f.ba27 630 Fa1/0.630
Feb 5 16:49:53: PPPoE 396: O PADS L:0003.e3e8.f730 R:000a.e44f.ba27 630 Fa1/0.630
Feb 5 16:49:53: %LINK-3-UPDOWN: Interface Virtual-Access2, changed state to up
Feb 5 16:49:54: PPPoE 396: I PADT L:0003.e3e8.f730 R:000a.e44f.ba27 630 Fa1/0.630
Feb 5 16:49:54: PPPoE 396: Shutting down
Feb 5 16:49:54: PPPoE 396: O PADT L:0003.e3e8.f730 R:000a.e44f.ba27 630 Fa1/0.630
Feb 5 16:49:54: PPPoE 396: Destroying L:0003.e3e8.f730 R:000a.e44f.ba27 630 Fa1/0.630
Feb 5 16:49:54: %LINK-3-UPDOWN: Interface Virtual-Access2, changed state to down
PPPoE#sho idb
Maximum number of IDBs 300
24 SW IDBs allocated (2624 bytes each)
19 HW IDBs allocated (4976 bytes each)
HWIDB#1 1 Ethernet0/0 (HW IFINDEX, Ether)
HWIDB#2 3 BRI0/0 (HW IFINDEX, HW ISDN, Serial)
HWIDB#3 4 Serial0/0 (HW IFINDEX, Serial)
HWIDB#4 5 BRI0/0:1 (HW ISDN, Serial)
HWIDB#5 6 BRI0/0:2 (HW ISDN, Serial)
HWIDB#6 7 Serial0/1 (HW IFINDEX, Serial)
HWIDB#7 8 FastEthernet1/0 (DOT1Q, HW IFINDEX, Ether)
HWIDB#8 9 Virtual-Access1 (Serial, HW VACCESS)
HWIDB#9 10 Virtual-Access2 (Serial, HW VACCESS)
HWIDB#10 11 Virtual-Access3 (Serial, HW VACCESS)
HWIDB#11 12 Virtual-Access4 (Serial, HW VACCESS)
HWIDB#12 13 Virtual-Access5 (Serial, HW VACCESS)
HWIDB#13 14 Virtual-Access6 (Serial, HW VACCESS)
HWIDB#14 15 Virtual-Template10 (HW IFINDEX, Serial, HW VTEMPLATE)
HWIDB#15 16 Loopback0 (HW IFINDEX)
Solved! Go to Solution.
02-07-2007 01:41 PM
This will happen when using an ip address on the VT itself, instead make it ip unnumbered.
You have:
interface Virtual-Template10
ip address 192.168.125.125 255.255.255.252
Change to:
interface loopback 100
ip address 192.168.125.125 255.255.255.252
interface Virtual-Template10
ip unnumbered loopback 100
Please post further questions in the Ask-the -expert session I am holding.
Thanks,
Mak
02-05-2007 06:10 AM
You shouldn't be hitting that limit.. see the following it may help:
02-05-2007 12:33 PM
Keep in mind that your dhcp pool only has room for 7 clients. Make sure that you don't have an exclusion list (that part's not included in your config example) that is cutting out any of those ip addresses from the pool.
02-06-2007 11:18 PM
No there are no exclusion lists.
The pool size was expanded with the same results.
Any other suggestions?
Thanks
Shekhar Basnet
02-07-2007 01:41 PM
This will happen when using an ip address on the VT itself, instead make it ip unnumbered.
You have:
interface Virtual-Template10
ip address 192.168.125.125 255.255.255.252
Change to:
interface loopback 100
ip address 192.168.125.125 255.255.255.252
interface Virtual-Template10
ip unnumbered loopback 100
Please post further questions in the Ask-the -expert session I am holding.
Thanks,
Mak
02-07-2007 11:49 PM
Yahoooo!! Success at last.. Thanks a lot Mak. But I would love to know the reason behind it. So even changing the subnet on VT to /24 would have had no effect then?
PPPoE#sho user
Line User Host(s) Idle Location
* 66 vty 0 shekhar idle 00:00:00 x.x.233.248
Interface User Mode Idle Peer Address
Vi1 silt Virtual PPP (PPPoE ) 00:00:05 x.x.225.35
Vi2 hhc123 Virtual PPP (PPPoE ) 00:00:15 x.x.225.37
Vi3 mahaguthi Virtual PPP (PPPoE ) 00:00:55 x.x.225.33
Vi4 atlas Virtual PPP (PPPoE ) 00:00:35 x.x.225.36
Vi5 hope Virtual PPP (PPPoE ) 00:01:35 x.x.225.34
Vi6 ktptest Virtual PPP (PPPoE ) 00:00:05 x.x.225.38
PPPoE#
Find answers to your questions by entering keywords or phrases in the Search bar above. New here? Use these resources to familiarize yourself with the community: