> and possibly after I've destroyed and recreated the interface atleast once
> (I think that was the case all 3 times now, not sure if its relevant) I
> get a page fault in sppp_keepalive (+0x2c).

Yes, known problem. This is the slow timeout handler getting called on a 
deleted interface.

> Even if I don't create the pppoe0 interface and don't call pppoectl to
> associate it with an ethernet interface, pppoe still seems to be listening
> on my ethernet interface.  I get "pppoe: received PADO but could not find
> request for it" kernel messages.

Well, right. Maybe these messages should moved inside some diagnostic
option, but they should not cause real problems. The ethernet input path
recognizes the incoming packets if PPPOE is configured in the kernel and
tries to find an active pppoe interface for them. Failure to find this is
an error, typically - but not in the situation you describe.

> Is there any way to see what the remote IP address is?

Yeah, I'll fix this real soon now, it causes major lossage for some other
work I'm about to commit.

> Is "route add -ifp pppoe0 default 0.0.0.1" the correct way to add a
> default route bound to the interface (i.e. immune to IP address change)?

That's the way I do it - and it works for me. Soon there'll be an alternative
way, acompanied by pppoe configuration documentation...


Martin