Re: [Captive-portals] Review of draft-ietf-capport-rfc7710bis

"Martin Thomson" <mt@lowentropy.net> Thu, 25 July 2019 16:03 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 2889C1202BE for <captive-portals@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 25 Jul 2019 09:03:08 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.701
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.701 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_PASS=-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=mfPAh+Wz; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=messagingengine.com header.b=x3T17VqN
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 0mA_lP4WZTNL for <captive-portals@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 25 Jul 2019 09:03:06 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from out5-smtp.messagingengine.com (out5-smtp.messagingengine.com [66.111.4.29]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 784941202B7 for <captive-portals@ietf.org>; Thu, 25 Jul 2019 09:03:06 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from compute1.internal (compute1.nyi.internal [10.202.2.41]) by mailout.nyi.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id AB895221D8; Thu, 25 Jul 2019 12:03:05 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from imap2 ([10.202.2.52]) by compute1.internal (MEProxy); Thu, 25 Jul 2019 12:03:05 -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 :cc:subject:content-type; s=fm2; bh=9ThlbVW8yQzx0TENGp/MGGcGFETx JiV1MTCxRtVRzDs=; b=mfPAh+WzNidt2WVH7w4AfMdCEQTHqOv7xSFBnqBjogTH O+pF9UQ1GdSC6KxmYNEaHWAavXhan/ZY/tsmIKju7hQnr6cLVaMiQi4aHWhqdYj6 Hli6y2J9VEzYwjy8h0uSDQRy6FqXNuNYdVel6Jhbazz4RZYFsQwYgiGKOoHhfZ4U lSNTJGrN95uqWnRbAeEiKKWYMxylmbxGxYOcmD1c1ZQKlVRTjv/+nQnC1McyzNSI gX3n8PgkrjWNWoO2IZM9mzu1fMPavPpHXwmXGBY1AebEebp7vKyEqSjGX/buFtAu ZALbv8ANUHWdmGUzPWePClRQ3zAH92G4F6Id4Gn1WQ==
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d= messagingengine.com; h=cc: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=fm3; bh=9ThlbV W8yQzx0TENGp/MGGcGFETxJiV1MTCxRtVRzDs=; b=x3T17VqNYHnbACbNS+J9vw fgvJErBS+E+csfhPkoSnZBSjBspKy05Fetp1fv6O8UNyVZje0wzeaoFmLRJBDr1u vFL1qMNMSBBI3kt30HfY3e4yH15fSaQPMQPNKWCfSc6KdyniEysLjQiQannSl6fK 2LTuxfEfFg+gjARHWyEgxEyDt8tj9e9mq9cy7EvcwhqUNOH8WEl8jK9c+Qa+et6n DPYe0kpRZss0TRQFbYpQJ0iTd0yjh7RtECGp5pryp7p2mRkWQZ2mjMNV6c5U0tnO Tn3SQYDF86MndNzIqIUCDjm3P2iYUIaPQnDJ6F5s7Wcxk4B/cmnbXgdmopj7UQ7g ==
X-ME-Sender: <xms:udI5XQd25Y9hu8zOS3gg9XElEG9e9UG8ONFk-fFf4gqX6sRn1DSNsw>
X-ME-Proxy-Cause: gggruggvucftvghtrhhoucdtuddrgeduvddrkedvgdelgecutefuodetggdotefrodftvf curfhrohhfihhlvgemucfhrghsthforghilhdpqfgfvfdpuffrtefokffrpgfnqfghnecu uegrihhlohhuthemuceftddtnecusecvtfgvtghiphhivghnthhsucdlqddutddtmdenuc fjughrpefofgggkfgjfhffhffvufgtsehttdertderredtnecuhfhrohhmpedfofgrrhht ihhnucfvhhhomhhsohhnfdcuoehmtheslhhofigvnhhtrhhophihrdhnvghtqeenucfrrg hrrghmpehmrghilhhfrhhomhepmhhtsehlohifvghnthhrohhphidrnhgvthenucevlhhu shhtvghrufhiiigvpedt
X-ME-Proxy: <xmx:udI5XYzLefPtYyFllVbuzMGNoLynWucTRLFmuIO6xvq2fxg3WMvVnA> <xmx:udI5XeueVJZpRAJBsMzHx-pKVtEoB7BAls-_eo2XJx_M5MyKmlsKww> <xmx:udI5XYCtp2CAud2iBdNqk6GwBDFpElUdTY-ViBGEYNNw_ICfkSPEYQ> <xmx:udI5XSNBYsQ1oLUGGiwQkyKy-wxIjdL2er6VWjMSeZHl0su7l_AgUA>
Received: by mailuser.nyi.internal (Postfix, from userid 501) id 2D214E066C; Thu, 25 Jul 2019 12:03:05 -0400 (EDT)
X-Mailer: MessagingEngine.com Webmail Interface
User-Agent: Cyrus-JMAP/3.1.6-736-gdfb8e44-fmstable-20190718v2
Mime-Version: 1.0
Message-Id: <b3589726-5f46-42e4-846b-ee195cab7ab6@www.fastmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CADo9JyXT1+Vopz_u1XjQABkzGLvCdoBs9ePXXNANaZ8FTf4_0A@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAKD1Yr32DXr8fYHP_x7z9pQWwSchey8zQW11vw02bW9ONEV8Kg@mail.gmail.com> <01ad5bf0-1f60-4dbb-aa83-31d14fce6082@www.fastmail.com> <CAKD1Yr08LmfDhmDLqpR87iQQ4Z61CVpR9BTDeRHobpsvVxFJvA@mail.gmail.com> <CADo9JyW6TmBnr5f0AuSXKnKMXnMxGhMkgYbGQ1WYOQjSMefy=w@mail.gmail.com> <CAKD1Yr1Zo0NQod=p4ZqT6fJYJ=Xqh1q8eJT2+ich+p7Jmg1WiA@mail.gmail.com> <CADo9JyX1T8AnxirXLfGdcJzmjvy5_UGJktnbYByAuO7H++y8uA@mail.gmail.com> <bb3dea12-294d-4a68-82b4-cc487f242f19@www.fastmail.com> <CADo9JyWZ0YjXUky+m_PDWc8BrjFVzOvs6XmjqUcV18hbPE_BpA@mail.gmail.com> <CADo9JyXT1+Vopz_u1XjQABkzGLvCdoBs9ePXXNANaZ8FTf4_0A@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 25 Jul 2019 12:03:03 -0400
From: Martin Thomson <mt@lowentropy.net>
To: David Bird <dbird@google.com>
Cc: captive-portals@ietf.org
Content-Type: text/plain
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/captive-portals/_22MNyU3wsnn2wYmL-VDFDxlwzo>
Subject: Re: [Captive-portals] Review of draft-ietf-capport-rfc7710bis
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: Thu, 25 Jul 2019 16:03:08 -0000

Thanks for the extra info David,

On Thu, Jul 25, 2019, at 10:10, David Bird wrote:
> However, who would own the API SSL cert? Often times, the "hotspot 
> services company" isn't the owner of the WLAN Controller. Ideally, the 
> venue is buying their own certs and installing them in their own gear.. 
> but, is that what will happen in practice? I could also imagine that 
> hotspot services companies will see the API an extension of their 
> service and want to control it... so, my question is, how will vendors 
> implement this? 

One possibility is to have the device phone home for a globally unique name, and maybe even a certificate (or it could implement an ACME client on its own).  It's a trick that some small devices already use.

I appreciate that this is not a trivial operation, but nor is it massively complex.