Re: [Captive-portals] Éric Vyncke's No Objection on draft-ietf-capport-rfc7710bis-07: (with COMMENT)

Erik Kline <ek.ietf@gmail.com> Sun, 31 May 2020 05:59 UTC

Return-Path: <ek.ietf@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 12B0D3A125B; Sat, 30 May 2020 22:59:04 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.099
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.099 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, 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 xx87Hedo-eZV; Sat, 30 May 2020 22:59:02 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-ot1-x329.google.com (mail-ot1-x329.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::329]) (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 96B0F3A1258; Sat, 30 May 2020 22:59:02 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-ot1-x329.google.com with SMTP id 69so5385497otv.2; Sat, 30 May 2020 22:59:02 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=dwcYWB7nu1RyoE3Gab650q6kuAcnKC0TMB95IPQ4Z3I=; b=H+2oSs8mELjb104tMYJb2Qw9rYsIAbXE5wOnb/jtS3UfWgBOhXTmp7oX/C5mTnvehL s3wmqIu0bB8a+Jo6UmOL09+Raiy/Z6nnKzg4j6uTYWhBRnrxaxc2OxYzwRdUTtiEJAL6 FXnuN7jGXCyKixCr+xl0QU5Sna6VR19VG8PvfKi/bU59yoltGMC/n6540gnzrNn3866n u87UJqKKX08QjbVeeqhgF24kx1p/7pgMqHIGRaZ+NFI+u3MWyaZbWkvN1p6IXJ6FxVYS fav7RqpYdY9GlGSR+1UCpsr6Mcym52E1JzdZ3qMOaxvzwysmK8UQmtszu7soltAWMDHz P78g==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=dwcYWB7nu1RyoE3Gab650q6kuAcnKC0TMB95IPQ4Z3I=; b=W39xGNrREmBMiCgtkjXGoFhA0ItVqbxA4M6sy+sfRMTvO8Ub5Sw3K+K/islNn6Dfoa X1Eeu7RXknF5nEeAOlyW+WcYiOHAvsqmZCaH/Tv8pvPxqLBe2HhEpmrxzsuraxdFIiRX lh50smV7Wrt2l+b5GleocbUeMNG8bF7taayNdiygx+MFPmUVGlYEUTI6ezekWZZB+AgD 60aNSXFj5CKLkPVPqLVDUEQv7FDKbvxO2Vsu1GfYdOUnlXKMO3kdLGspRrNTUpMibAJ4 a6uE9PBcfbDZDJOsljy+w1HV4XQqNL8jF3cvGJeswPl9/L2dwsWIkbSmyoZ+KUdvfoF2 gA/g==
X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM531R3RZolwFQ9LulMtnMp7I3GzobvYUEgtisA6VeD37CCrAPZ82W cU1y42QxNu2+Njzyiuejwbv324Brwjn51FPmfjI=
X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJxDx9fZOzWKd3QmGjZdA6Ff9BMb0yWyduvoy9vaVcErUXpT7wsSyXQQC+/UbSqNRrxiz1pQUhzntjoEVP3czNk=
X-Received: by 2002:a05:6830:1af4:: with SMTP id c20mr5630472otd.191.1590904740693; Sat, 30 May 2020 22:59:00 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <159058960319.16509.10406734860794473655@ietfa.amsl.com>
In-Reply-To: <159058960319.16509.10406734860794473655@ietfa.amsl.com>
From: Erik Kline <ek.ietf@gmail.com>
Date: Sat, 30 May 2020 22:58:49 -0700
Message-ID: <CAMGpriUGzdtGpjJuAWsmzuCXrQANwo=QJKV-PzmBJB4zx7ZdFA@mail.gmail.com>
To: =?UTF-8?B?w4lyaWMgVnluY2tl?= <evyncke@cisco.com>
Cc: The IESG <iesg@ietf.org>, draft-ietf-capport-rfc7710bis@ietf.org, capport-chairs@ietf.org, captive-portals <captive-portals@ietf.org>, Martin Thomson <mt@lowentropy.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/captive-portals/AhyrYUShGjs_iZ9rpi0i4CsCpO8>
Subject: Re: [Captive-portals] =?utf-8?q?=C3=89ric_Vyncke=27s_No_Objection_on?= =?utf-8?q?_draft-ietf-capport-rfc7710bis-07=3A_=28with_COMMENT=29?=
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: Sun, 31 May 2020 05:59:04 -0000

> -- Section 2.2 ==
> In "should not be provisioned", I would suggest to use the normative "SHOULD".

Good catch. Done.

> == NITS ==
>
> -- Abstract --
> Not all users of a captive portal are 'customers', they can be guests,
> students, employees, ... suggest to use 'users' (and even in the world of IoT).

Agreed.

> -- Section 2 --
> Authors, being English natives, are probably correct but " should not be
> provisioned via IPv6 DHCP nor IPv6 RA options." looks weird to m; why not "
> should be provisioned via neither IPv6 DHCP nor IPv6 RA
>  options." ?

You're right, this text is weird -- and it's my fault.  I've change it
in github [1] to be:

      The maximum length of the URI that can be carried in IPv4 DHCP is 255
      bytes, so URIs longer than 255 bytes SHOULD NOT be provisioned by any of
      the IPv6 options described in this document.

I debated adding a qualifier statement on the end to the effect of: ",
unless it is known that DHCPv4 is never used on this network", but I
did not go that far.

Thanks,
-ek

[1] https://github.com/capport-wg/7710bis/commit/ca984eecdf770dc2a52b7d98e40d93fb61c827fd