Re: [Captive-portals] Captive-Portal Identification in DHCP / RA draft-ietf-capport-rfc7710bis-03

Martin Thomson <mt@lowentropy.net> Mon, 27 April 2020 22:54 UTC

Return-Path: <mt@lowentropy.net>
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 727743A0D0C for <captive-portals@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 27 Apr 2020 15:54:40 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.1
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.1 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, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=lowentropy.net header.b=WqMEkSd2; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=messagingengine.com header.b=wFdgAiK7
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 qew5pWLLJ4xW for <captive-portals@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 27 Apr 2020 15:54:38 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from wout4-smtp.messagingengine.com (wout4-smtp.messagingengine.com [64.147.123.20]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D1A1B3A0D0B for <captive-portals@ietf.org>; Mon, 27 Apr 2020 15:54:38 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from compute2.internal (compute2.nyi.internal [10.202.2.42]) by mailout.west.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id CD46B756 for <captive-portals@ietf.org>; Mon, 27 Apr 2020 18:54:37 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from imap2 ([10.202.2.52]) by compute2.internal (MEProxy); Mon, 27 Apr 2020 18:54:37 -0400
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=lowentropy.net; h=mime-version:message-id:in-reply-to:references:date:from:to :subject:content-type; s=fm2; bh=QLwN0iTT7Vz5Ue9AT4oZEKo9DWmBlru p5zwhaSw2I/0=; b=WqMEkSd23XKCls7qAjsScq81StLTkk6+aMDYhXtEJv3gV9/ c5xrNnzt13F0PclhmUON9gfmaMSnnSbh4Hrbt8dw1Ol8ghwlRnyUOybc31R6vBun mLmaFcYb4CpBhngHk4/LHUEhjBsOiKrsAHZmAvV5d4W6l/jqd4MDADF2HjCGJCsW dLl0Qnr1icl6flqfT5tqNuDlpncr1Yewcb8lsAmcV0LMVkQ6L/7hPkPCFjKUsooz JS/YPQJRX5hjVgraYJCE1irxz6rle57sozLZJSd/xongPhA4nIgHV7Pv1+Q+hPEW 4YNwx1U6BAuiRUHK3CyoBBsYUVbhEBCTtUooNmg==
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d= messagingengine.com; h=content-type:date:from:in-reply-to :message-id:mime-version:references:subject:to:x-me-proxy :x-me-proxy:x-me-sender:x-me-sender:x-sasl-enc; s=fm2; bh=QLwN0i TT7Vz5Ue9AT4oZEKo9DWmBlrup5zwhaSw2I/0=; b=wFdgAiK7PXM70+jeh+5dp9 5E/AohaRjue/t+09Zw/dTsSL9GQJTQCK3JxQmLm1hICkvwuDxLorAXLruIYqSz90 AmYM5Oug+3oDH0U57cNnAdXOqEw7mStk7QjRsLXIdF8B1HTVSRvstty0qn9c7UhD nTuTq8VJIVEX/yiLKZgvsrJZms9gQo787TPG2mxWkQRzkfj6VlEPfNrTsOvbxy/o Ixqy20ZzHWcUwi0PrpQyEBYG9zA1+V8yNLECyhx6lymhqm9ur0ra+7akP1yYOxwB 5XKtm6RlcMqN3RlSU+/xW35jWJsGSWjub+IrAOtEJkYp9AR8V4SYG9n/cd2a8FfA ==
X-ME-Sender: <xms:rGKnXvdyGT5yUNm64z24tmXgd-ITvTt7qdOZ5ILj36D97D4g0oS08Q>
X-ME-Proxy-Cause: gggruggvucftvghtrhhoucdtuddrgeduhedriedtgddufecutefuodetggdotefrodftvf curfhrohhfihhlvgemucfhrghsthforghilhdpqfgfvfdpuffrtefokffrpgfnqfghnecu uegrihhlohhuthemuceftddtnecunecujfgurhepofgfggfkjghffffhvffutgesthdtre dtreerjeenucfhrhhomhepfdforghrthhinhcuvfhhohhmshhonhdfuceomhhtsehlohif vghnthhrohhphidrnhgvtheqnecuffhomhgrihhnpehivghtfhdrohhrghenucevlhhush htvghrufhiiigvpedtnecurfgrrhgrmhepmhgrihhlfhhrohhmpehmtheslhhofigvnhht rhhophihrdhnvght
X-ME-Proxy: <xmx:rGKnXqG0pfioxVU3jCTNShfHBV9MMTwMTuTS_k59k4YRiSlJbtpzgQ> <xmx:rGKnXhHXjhRfovXMoJXxWz_MbjVm9IFucF55wu4HxWiSPG1c0QjV5w> <xmx:rGKnXiMnuvMeqVjrU47I9FGeerxJUy-I5lYUmgIcS-PCWxpbnUWURw> <xmx:rWKnXhDSsbrmIkmg7gXDGQcvsrz1rbM-Rzbudr577Po12h8Ds-t-dg>
Received: by mailuser.nyi.internal (Postfix, from userid 501) id 78945E00AD; Mon, 27 Apr 2020 18:54:36 -0400 (EDT)
X-Mailer: MessagingEngine.com Webmail Interface
User-Agent: Cyrus-JMAP/3.3.0-dev0-351-g9981f4f-fmstable-20200421v1
Mime-Version: 1.0
Message-Id: <ae7991d5-9eed-4d91-aa43-9630401c21d4@www.fastmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <566F2FF8-6F5B-43F9-BB33-4D399013844E@commscope.com>
References: <566F2FF8-6F5B-43F9-BB33-4D399013844E@commscope.com>
Date: Tue, 28 Apr 2020 08:54:17 +1000
From: "Martin Thomson" <mt@lowentropy.net>
To: captive-portals@ietf.org
Content-Type: text/plain
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/captive-portals/W41Y9EJHbFT5pDdI8KXBH3abi8E>
Subject: Re: [Captive-portals] =?utf-8?q?Captive-Portal_Identification_in_DHC?= =?utf-8?q?P_/_RA_draft-ietf-capport-rfc7710bis-03?=
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: Mon, 27 Apr 2020 22:54:41 -0000

Thanks for the input.  Apparently great minds think alike as another reviewer found the exact same shortcoming just days ago.  The next revision should have these fixed.

On Tue, Apr 28, 2020, at 05:07, Tirupachur Comerica, Subash wrote:
>  
> Hi,
> 
> I was reviewing this draft and found a few missing text(sometimes 
> obvious) enumerated below(missing text in *_bold underline_*)
> 
> Section 2.1 IPv4 DHCP Option
> 
>  o Code: The Captive-Portal DHCPv4 option (TBD) (one octet).
> 
>  o Len: The length, in octets of the URI.*_(one octet)_*
> 
> Section 2.2: IPv6 DHCP Option
> 
>  o option-code: The Captive-Portal DHCPv6 option (103) (two octets).
> 
>  o option-len: The length, in octets of the URI.*_(two octets) --? 
> Please see question below_*
> 
>  o URI: The contact URI for the captive portal that the user should
> 
>  connect to (encoded following the rules in [RFC3986 
> <https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc3986>]).
> 
> 
> - *Question on the above option-len: If this is two octets in IPv6 DHCP 
> option, then the URI can be longer then 255. Option-len-value <=255, 
> correct?*
> 
> 
> Section 2.3: The Captive-Portal IPv6 RA Option
> 
>  o Type: 37*_(one octet)_*
> 
>  o Length: 8-bit unsigned integer. The length of the option
> 
>  (including the Type and Length fields) in units of 8 bytes.(*_one octet_*)
> 
>  o URI: The contact URI for the captive portal that the user should
> 
>  connect to. For the reasons described above, the implementer
> 
>  might want to use an IP address literal instead of a DNS name.
> 
>  This should be padded with NULL (0x0) to make the total option
> 
>  length (including the Type and Length fields) a multiple of 8
> 
>  bytes.
> 
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> Subash
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Captive-portals mailing list
> Captive-portals@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/captive-portals
>