Bug 299 - Linuxconf should support all ppp options
Linuxconf should support all ppp options
Status: CLOSED WONTFIX
Product: Red Hat Linux
Classification: Retired
Component: linuxconf (Show other bugs)
5.2
i386 Linux
medium Severity medium
: ---
: ---
Assigned To: Michael K. Johnson
:
Depends On:
Blocks:
  Show dependency treegraph
 
Reported: 1998-12-04 10:35 EST by Michael Meissner
Modified: 2008-05-01 11:37 EDT (History)
0 users

See Also:
Fixed In Version:
Doc Type: Bug Fix
Doc Text:
Story Points: ---
Clone Of:
Environment:
Last Closed: 1999-02-11 15:24:23 EST
Type: ---
Regression: ---
Mount Type: ---
Documentation: ---
CRM:
Verified Versions:
Category: ---
oVirt Team: ---
RHEL 7.3 requirements from Atomic Host:
Cloudforms Team: ---


Attachments (Terms of Use)

  None (edit)
Description Michael Meissner 1998-12-04 10:35:36 EST
Linuxconf should have buttons for each of the ppp options
that can be specified (along with a catchall to support new
options), with help for each option, so you can easily
determine what options to set, without having the NET-3
and/or pppd man page open while running linuxconf.

Glancing at the pppd 2.3.5 man page, options that should be
setable include: passive, bsdcomp, chap-interval,
chap-max-challenge, chap-restart, deflate, demand, domain,
holdoff, idle, ipcp-accept-local, ipcp-accept-remote,
ipcp-max-failure, ipcp-max-terminate, ipcp-restart, ipparm,
all of the ipx options, all of the lcp options, ms-dns,
ms-wins, noipdefault, all of the pap options, persist,
predictor1, vj-max-slots, welcome.
Comment 1 Jay Turner 1998-12-09 14:09:59 EST
This is really an enhancement request, not a bug.
Comment 2 David Lawrence 1998-12-10 12:53:59 EST
This has been assigned to a developer for future enhancement requests.
Comment 3 Michael K. Johnson 1999-02-11 15:24:59 EST
I disagree with this request.  We specifically chose the options
that would be useful to the most people to avoid being confusing;
the other options are only useful to people who know what they
want to do anyway.  We are willing to consider adding specific
options, but we need a coherent argument why each particular option
would have wide use before adding it.

Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.