Re: [Captive-portals] CAPPORT meeting at IETF95 in Buenos Aires.

+1 on the consent point. I'm aware of a number of organisations which
believe that they need user consent to carry out necessary security
monitoring of their networks. That provides a justification for
portal-avoidance-avoidance features in captive portal systems.

On Tue, Feb 16, 2016 at 11:15 AM, Yaron Sheffer <yaronf.ietf@gmail.com>
wrote:

> OK, so here's two minor comments:
>
>    - Your markdown-to-RFC tool misses out on asterisks that are being
>    used for bold text, and remain in the TXT version (Sec. 3).
>    - In Sec. 2.1, we need to use the word "consent". Captive portals not
>    only present information, but require user interaction to indicate the
>    user's acceptance of terms of service.
>
> Thanks,
>     Yaron
>
> On 02/16/2016 01:24 AM, Mark Nottingham wrote:
>
> On 16 Feb 2016, at 4:46 AM, Warren Kumari <warren@kumari.net> <warren@kumari.net> wrote:
>
> Mark Nottingham is already working on a "problem statement" type draft with outlines some of this, but we'd like more viewpoints/ discussions.
>
> Please!
>
>
> His initial submission is here: "Before You Log In, Here's A Brief Message From Our Sponsors!" - draft-nottingham-capport-problem (https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-nottingham-capport-problem/)
>
> ... and that's really just a regurgitation of what we previously put together at <https://github.com/httpwg/wiki/wiki/Captive-Portals> <https://github.com/httpwg/wiki/wiki/Captive-Portals>.  If people have suggestions, corrections, pull requests, etc. I'm all ears.
>
> Cheers,
>
>
>
> --
> Mark Nottingham   https://www.mnot.net/
>
> _______________________________________________
> Captive-portals mailing listCaptive-portals@ietf.orghttps://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/captive-portals
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Captive-portals mailing list
> Captive-portals@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/captive-portals
>
>