IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [Captive-portals] practicality of 511 HTTP status code

Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de> Fri, 23 June 2017 18:34 UTC

Return-Path: <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
X-Original-To: captive-portals@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: captive-portals@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id F3F2A128CFF for <captive-portals@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 23 Jun 2017 11:34:36 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -4.2
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.2 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H2=-2.8, RCVD_IN_SORBS_SPAM=0.5, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id TdcBgNgCH8LK for <captive-portals@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 23 Jun 2017 11:34:34 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mout.gmx.net (mout.gmx.net [212.227.17.20]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id BF5441286B2 for <captive-portals@ietf.org>; Fri, 23 Jun 2017 11:34:30 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [192.168.178.20] ([93.217.101.164]) by mail.gmx.com (mrgmx101 [212.227.17.168]) with ESMTPSA (Nemesis) id 0M35iN-1dfJEm3WxL-00swP4; Fri, 23 Jun 2017 20:34:24 +0200
To: Dave Dolson <ddolson@sandvine.com>, Vincent van Dam <VvanDam@sandvine.com>, David Bird <dbird@google.com>, Erik Kline <ek@google.com>
Cc: "captive-portals@ietf.org" <captive-portals@ietf.org>
References: <CAAedzxrPo+qSBWP23=fpwG0ZzBrdOMgs0gykAxOPSFbojeR79A@mail.gmail.com> <CADo9JyVrO6fcOtYXc=VtrfmhFsYdHY=3t4nM2xLG3CBnzizWJQ@mail.gmail.com> <D2A19ABBC0147C40BFBB83D1CF3E95F03FEB4A22@wtl-exchp-2.sandvine.com> <E8355113905631478EFF04F5AA706E987061F965@wtl-exchp-1.sandvine.com>
From: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
Message-ID: <6c04ed2c-9d26-eb9d-b4e3-5205845d0fa4@gmx.de>
Date: Fri, 23 Jun 2017 20:34:23 +0200
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; WOW64; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/52.2.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <E8355113905631478EFF04F5AA706E987061F965@wtl-exchp-1.sandvine.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="windows-1252"; format="flowed"
Content-Language: en-US
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-Provags-ID: V03:K0:+l7lNQDEJJZOmjjIktnFVgqTD901H/cNmpl27n23nDKdkPukFpE WKuuBnEG4CGFLUcpmYgQhQ5UeCo+EeloyNYuDQ601OcFyVK02XA8GBIWd30A8/UiPbPo22d FZHyv/ZFfVLod1zJej3dOmnaWjQAOmTiICVCZcqRZnS74iD1au8V3wM6iYqrAT+S3xAUdT/ apqU5Nbi7liBvu8tt2zNg==
X-UI-Out-Filterresults: notjunk:1;V01:K0:ATFocv7W9H8=:Gbz6PeJk+W8KEBPEnXOlwE krvfbGXvXvVnJ4RlayMGjW7dPS864rh5VFzdlTfFAGdcUsc8pkBOsFvX3cp9u/vTGaG3DwAsD iU3/bRdOqNDcDJYXdHGM7BwLDyBybpIDwgjTeoxvxWs1P6nSM7xLqesE/tX/U4wFD/bBsF7bN bdwZ/HQoWk5jrWVHhWEN6j+kwbMXfOhtgfXR9Vt/PvmHuarXJ2kg9OkZo8FQNj2PWtSgY1KV3 tfUjYKOnTRDLtjMMhidJet3MTz8sfqWq4cUNeS0n8p/ej13AVEjZfqmrd2oj8ub6VZubokhJ1 1lkYGxFRCz4i+dx5oMSrlxjAgdxsi4v+cFxJylHr9/DHd+7rBFvp1AL8ZsHiVIBvhdqyFzGLp 0HM8TSGwUMkDiNgfQpoiP3pFFpnubSvCGaYzQkhLuG71ke/qce5ATcL4xxgV2BHeNaljDISrJ Jzh+7L1rfQJOx89W0JebwEEofnkpiIIiGgultX1rzdI9OLH7CaZ/ZYG78cb56ij7fuO0t7Bv7 W85Udayegj1lfHgGesWrLCTu3WG4GJqsesjowAAgVdk/FIWNYPMbsqOPI6PLp3M+Ar1oExn7l AA1vDWHRn84OZPEgEVBjWYvxyJrQAiB2Byc/9ywvW2jQQzMzLkMODZQZYx573Vy6dY70GoljM XZJDFgFI+ArGItvhwCpswGr6f5p9GEfoPLu04TSJi8jQcjp+NSzEN8DQ3DDuZW+3yX3sEbjH4 7q/puJAoBQuKhv+O1kab5LA0hr8mMIpK3bHsBakz/cl3KXSxAjesXfakH1k33uyQaJkygXJqf raO6K03
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/captive-portals/2HvOVmpL6y6OsosZHNrTspcBG9U>
Subject: Re: [Captive-portals] practicality of 511 HTTP status code
X-BeenThere: captive-portals@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22
Precedence: list
List-Id: Discussion of issues related to captive portals <captive-portals.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/captive-portals>, <mailto:captive-portals-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/captive-portals/>
List-Post: <mailto:captive-portals@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:captive-portals-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/captive-portals>, <mailto:captive-portals-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 23 Jun 2017 18:34:37 -0000

On 2017-06-23 20:11, Dave Dolson wrote:
> It seems 511 is probably better than 30x for non-browser 
> requests—clearly an error instead of redirecting to something unexpected.
> 
> Is 511 likely to be OK for old IoT devices? Probably a better outcome 
> than 307.
> ...

FWIW, why is *307* desirable in the first place? Wouldn't it be better 
to use 301/302 or even 303?

Best regards, Julian

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email