IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [Captive-portals] Thoughts/comments on draft-nottingham-capport-problem-01

Michael Richardson <mcr+ietf@sandelman.ca> Mon, 04 April 2016 18:43 UTC

Return-Path: <mcr+ietf@sandelman.ca>
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 09DB512D61D for <captive-portals@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 4 Apr 2016 11:43:17 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.911
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.911 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01] 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 jRQ1ZmW3TJ13 for <captive-portals@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 4 Apr 2016 11:43:15 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from tuna.sandelman.ca (tuna.sandelman.ca [209.87.249.19]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id AB4C112D0B0 for <captive-portals@ietf.org>; Mon, 4 Apr 2016 11:43:15 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from sandelman.ca (obiwan.sandelman.ca [209.87.249.21]) by tuna.sandelman.ca (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9F130200A3; Mon, 4 Apr 2016 14:46:40 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from obiwan.sandelman.ca (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by sandelman.ca (Postfix) with ESMTP id A1D0B6375A; Mon, 4 Apr 2016 14:43:14 -0400 (EDT)
From: Michael Richardson <mcr+ietf@sandelman.ca>
To: "Cohen-Rose, Adam" <Adam.Cohen-Rose@sky.uk>
In-Reply-To: <D328543E.51AC4%adam.cohen-rose@sky.uk>
References: <D328543E.51AC4%adam.cohen-rose@sky.uk>
X-Mailer: MH-E 8.6; nmh 1.6+dev; GNU Emacs 24.4.2
X-Face: $\n1pF)h^`}$H>Hk{L"x@)JS7<%Az}5RyS@k9X%29-lHB$Ti.V>2bi.~ehC0; <'$9xN5Ub# z!G,p`nR&p7Fz@^UXIn156S8.~^@MJ*mMsD7=QFeq%AL4m<nPbLgmtKK-5dC@#:k
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="=-=-="; micalg="pgp-sha1"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"
Date: Mon, 04 Apr 2016 14:43:14 -0400
Message-ID: <17765.1459795394@obiwan.sandelman.ca>
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/captive-portals/CaFfp-KVWOnkhyY_xmXSKPtygps>
Cc: "captive-portals@ietf.org" <captive-portals@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [Captive-portals] Thoughts/comments on draft-nottingham-capport-problem-01
X-BeenThere: captive-portals@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17
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: Mon, 04 Apr 2016 18:43:17 -0000

Cohen-Rose, Adam <Adam.Cohen-Rose@sky.uk> wrote:
    > We operate both open and secured SSIDs, but since we are not a mobile
    > operator there is not yet any simple way for us to offer the secured SSID
    > to walk-up customers. One option that might be worth bearing in mind is
    > some mechanism to prompt customers to switch from the open SSID to the
    > alternative secured SSID in the same location.

So, a URL-scheme that could contain a pointer to the other SSID.

    > I¹m very happy to contribute towards an industry survey and will keep
    > following the discussion in the mailing list.

I'm super-happy to have you on the list.

--
Michael Richardson <mcr+IETF@sandelman.ca>, Sandelman Software Works
 -= IPv6 IoT consulting =-

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email