[Captive-portals] DHCP/Captive Portal Experiment at IETF106 - SIN

Christopher Morrow <christopher.morrow@gmail.com> Sat, 16 November 2019 09:09 UTC

Return-Path: <christopher.morrow@gmail.com>
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 E2D1F120103 for <captive-portals@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sat, 16 Nov 2019 01:09:17 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.999
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.999 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com
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 KY5cbx78GZRP for <captive-portals@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sat, 16 Nov 2019 01:09:16 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-qt1-x82a.google.com (mail-qt1-x82a.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::82a]) (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 E5A8412008B for <captive-portals@ietf.org>; Sat, 16 Nov 2019 01:09:15 -0800 (PST)
Received: by mail-qt1-x82a.google.com with SMTP id o11so13679787qtr.11 for <captive-portals@ietf.org>; Sat, 16 Nov 2019 01:09:15 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:from:date:message-id:subject:to; bh=IrCs9cdrmaVxehFeIJgnA4GS1d1b6Et5KnK764qV7BU=; b=UkM3upAaXkFWxt2I+pXiFYmTbFE4PGVOfKibyuKt7SoNSV7GHPfwuhOYbdxETl8C6Z qNJUWRapN9Wd4hkJmMvYANECeM5iUedZK5w9PLORPYHy9bd+QJfXgtwXpOcmEwGY6WH7 3bQTQm0UQbmeMa32Iln/8j1bN4lROYF+D2D20GgxgUv3JicxuzDR3SMO8ZFdIZw9hKhT 3xI+DokNABcZ4zxF1HAoYrdW+nTyxfz7/HlA2FmC2fAJP4iTgLde13PHA0pwc6eQzM2Q QTa6beKt52AQnfDewmT+1/PINMhPBcae5EVPDAwpUI0B/ZjqvNEF1j84oLC/DnOw0oO1 8m3Q==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:from:date:message-id:subject:to; bh=IrCs9cdrmaVxehFeIJgnA4GS1d1b6Et5KnK764qV7BU=; b=GFtav8dqy9oC/Rjs1ROmIO/t7Gu1+p0trVF9uVxTVA/a+DntDMZShxDhUam9oP+Jzs qzKkOPNpLn9Og4K4bKRlk8ijf2SLu6hyXc3sc3cwr+wxqmNDLVgZusa21rNElWr5oN2V pbqk+ONc1IJMijKXepmbNK26vpw7hc9BUKTnP9FC0hax7pBzh34S+HBQ1Ziwr6ln2xX+ H/jCLy0/tW0f8I2QJYOyw7K7gWln4zDaQZugdKAgNafuqZ6A0/yVFt1+wgnNOgp12QZr RM4fTJ0cxjeONDiR42XwnAG1sI4W+TBb84iiSxMMnttJ/i3jFuAhvTmQrV1tbG32zDXB KiHg==
X-Gm-Message-State: APjAAAXU/Sc2nDXa9GVV47T5xP2R5wsrZdvgmR/d5KQeglYIvrUUQyP4 5Q9VlRNjMqe/xC0M+0JlzyZKv02whiLTK9wO27+rZwPEkh0=
X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqyAru2b5+zu2EhLNqKa8VHJjcQiv3RpMcQlQb4Y1LG0La+xNHKOR52m2KBYmlah9SJYMdbjIy7LfcRLGYdFlvg=
X-Received: by 2002:ac8:199d:: with SMTP id u29mr17419949qtj.93.1573895354495; Sat, 16 Nov 2019 01:09:14 -0800 (PST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
From: Christopher Morrow <christopher.morrow@gmail.com>
Date: Sat, 16 Nov 2019 17:09:03 +0800
Message-ID: <CAL9jLaa+GzjEcfKc=j7=iROowfE2+rS5P9JKJ5kdMTWyJFjpjg@mail.gmail.com>
To: captive-portals@ietf.org
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/captive-portals/9dxZYUsW8g-ID4mMd92AABqUb4A>
Subject: [Captive-portals] DHCP/Captive Portal Experiment at IETF106 - SIN
X-BeenThere: captive-portals@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
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: Sat, 16 Nov 2019 09:09:18 -0000

Howdy!

During setup at the IETF meeting this week in Singapore the noc folk
setup an experiment on the IETF wireless network, specifically on the
IETF SSID to test your shiny new DHCP option(s) for captive portal,
information about that is detailed here:
  https://tickets.meeting.ietf.org/wiki/CAPPORT

So far, during our setup we noticed Polycom conference phones are
'unhappy' with this DHCP option (over ipv4). The Polycoms appear to
believe that option 160 is for 'boot file location' :( Ingesting a
json file for booting makes the Polycom sad :(

-chris

fyi:
There is a polycom community discussion about their behavior here:
  https://community.polycom.com/t5/VoIP-SIP-Phones/DHCP-Standardization-160-vs-66/m-p/72579/highlight/true#M13020