Re: [Captive-portals] time-based walled gardens

[Erik Kline <[e-mail]>]

On 12 April 2017 at 01:05, Christian Saunders <[e-mail]>
wrote:

> As a Captive Portal infrastructure architect for a Wi-Fi operator my bias
> should be clear.
>
> We use the Captive Portal to assist in customer on-boarding and to provide
> an improved user experience to users who are not entitled to access.
>
> That being said, it is possible that a captive portal could be used for
> abuse.
>
> Similarly, there is abhorrent traffic transmitted via HTTP but I certainly
> don't want this protocol to die.
>
> My hope would be for the group to move on to more relevant topics.
>

Indeed.  And it seems like we have.

Just to be clear, I think it only makes sense for us to speak and work in
terms of network access as a whole, per our charter.

I originally brought up zero rating because I saw some potential for
abuse.  But there are many such pitfalls, and we'll just have to be
cautious and address the ones we can in our documents.

I think we have some promising avenues for forward motion, in the ICMP and
architecture documents, but more on that in a separate thread.