IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [Captive-portals] Comments on draft-nottingham-capport-problem-00

"John Levine" <johnl@taugh.com> Tue, 08 March 2016 12:50 UTC

Return-Path: <johnl@taugh.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 7F43512D6AA for <captive-portals@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 8 Mar 2016 04:50:02 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -0.501
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.501 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_05=-0.5, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id OEaDXV5AoUdo for <captive-portals@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 8 Mar 2016 04:50:01 -0800 (PST)
Received: from miucha.iecc.com (abusenet-1-pt.tunnel.tserv4.nyc4.ipv6.he.net [IPv6:2001:470:1f06:1126::2]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 3CA3A12D620 for <captive-portals@ietf.org>; Tue, 8 Mar 2016 04:50:01 -0800 (PST)
Received: (qmail 9520 invoked from network); 8 Mar 2016 12:49:59 -0000
Received: from unknown (64.57.183.18) by mail1.iecc.com with QMQP; 8 Mar 2016 12:49:59 -0000
Date: Tue, 08 Mar 2016 12:49:37 -0000
Message-ID: <20160308124937.2948.qmail@ary.lan>
From: John Levine <johnl@taugh.com>
To: captive-portals@ietf.org
In-Reply-To: <20160307155423.1590733519F0@fafnir.remote.dragon.net>
Organization:
X-Headerized: yes
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-transfer-encoding: 8bit
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/captive-portals/cGUQOthQ5lxKz6pIHX9xkN1PJfk>
Cc: list-captive-portals@dragon.net
Subject: Re: [Captive-portals] Comments on draft-nottingham-capport-problem-00
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: Tue, 08 Mar 2016 12:50:02 -0000

>ddolson> Regarding non-browser clients, even non-HTTP clients, and
>ddolson> considering this is the IETF, it seems reasonable to find an
>ddolson> IP-layer solution vs. an HTTP-layer solution.
>
>Indeed... All sorts of phone apps don't use HTTP but need to tickle the
>reaction.

Even worse, they do use HTTP but expect an answer from their own server
and strange things happen when they get the portal's page instead.

R's,
John

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email