IETF Logo Mail Archive

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

"Livingood, Jason" <Jason_Livingood@comcast.com> Thu, 03 March 2016 13:24 UTC

Return-Path: <Jason_Livingood@comcast.com>
X-Original-To: captive-portals@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: captive-portals@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 17BBF1ACD42 for <captive-portals@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 3 Mar 2016 05:24:39 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: 0.229
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.229 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HELO_EQ_MODEMCABLE=0.768, HOST_EQ_MODEMCABLE=1.368, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.006, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=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 EEjWIq5oIbeI for <captive-portals@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 3 Mar 2016 05:24:38 -0800 (PST)
Received: from vaadcmhout01.cable.comcast.com (vaadcmhout01.cable.comcast.com [96.114.28.75]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D1D7B1ACD41 for <captive-portals@ietf.org>; Thu, 3 Mar 2016 05:24:37 -0800 (PST)
X-AuditID: 60721c4b-f79016d000007994-ff-56d83b148b83
Received: from VAADCEX35.cable.comcast.com (vaadcmhoutvip.cable.comcast.com [96.115.73.56]) (using TLS with cipher AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by vaadcmhout01.cable.comcast.com (SMTP Gateway) with SMTP id 2E.C6.31124.41B38D65; Thu, 3 Mar 2016 08:24:36 -0500 (EST)
Received: from VAADCEX39.cable.comcast.com (147.191.103.216) by VAADCEX35.cable.comcast.com (147.191.103.212) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1130.7; Thu, 3 Mar 2016 08:24:35 -0500
Received: from VAADCEX39.cable.comcast.com ([fe80::3aea:a7ff:fe12:37f4]) by VAADCEX39.cable.comcast.com ([fe80::3aea:a7ff:fe12:37f4%19]) with mapi id 15.00.1130.005; Thu, 3 Mar 2016 08:24:35 -0500
From: "Livingood, Jason" <Jason_Livingood@comcast.com>
To: Martin Thomson <martin.thomson@gmail.com>, Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net>
Thread-Topic: [Captive-portals] Comments on draft-nottingham-capport-problem-00
Thread-Index: AQHRdOHdJIQshoH8vkKD1VG28lgEHJ9HS3OAgABM8wCAAB3hAA==
Date: Thu, 03 Mar 2016 13:24:35 +0000
Message-ID: <D2FDA4A1.12A777%jason_livingood@cable.comcast.com>
References: <D2FCEB47.12A6DC%jason_livingood@cable.comcast.com> <C639FBF3-76DF-4334-8262-C6832DF01949@mnot.net> <CABkgnnW_7NK4Egmjsg4g3emZcD2Z_NViNCBLitUJiBNJMY8A2A@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CABkgnnW_7NK4Egmjsg4g3emZcD2Z_NViNCBLitUJiBNJMY8A2A@mail.gmail.com>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
user-agent: Microsoft-MacOutlook/14.5.8.151023
x-ms-exchange-messagesentrepresentingtype: 1
x-ms-exchange-transport-fromentityheader: Hosted
x-originating-ip: [68.87.29.10]
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="Windows-1252"
Content-ID: <EA0AA0833415E64BAB0F16C6D045C9A8@cable.comcast.com>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-CFilter-Loop: Reflected
X-Brightmail-Tracker: H4sIAAAAAAAAA+NgFvrAIsWRmVeSWpSXmKPExsWSUOxpoStifSPM4MlaGYu5sxpYLa6d+cdo sf7TY0YHZo+ds+6yeyxZ8pPJY+Pi76wBzFFcNimpOZllqUX6dglcGb975QvWslesbDBoYPzB 2sXIySEhYCLx6fkldghbTOLCvfVsXYxcHEICW5gkGn53s0I4BxklXm+fAuWcYJR4v3AzC0gL m4CZxN2FV5hBbBEBP4kZDcfA4swClhI7X65nArGFgeLbj7dB1QRKvLuzAcp2kri8AOIMFgEV iY1H+sDqeQXsJTbO28EMsWwHo8Tjr/1gQzmBmt98PA3WzAh06/dTa5gglolL3HoynwniBwGJ JXvOM0PYohIvH/8DWyAqoCdx8NNKqJ91JM5ef8IIYRtIbF26jwXClpc4MuEf1AMGEu/PzWeG sB0kGs6uZoSwtSWWLXzNDHGooMTJmU+geiUlDq64wTKBUWYWkpNmIRk1C8moWUhGzUIyagEj 6ypGubLExJTk3Iz80hIDQ73kxKScVL3k/NzkxOISEL2JEZQOimS8dzCu++l+iFGAg1GJh3et xo0wIdbEsuLK3EOMEhzMSiK87xSBQrwpiZVVqUX58UWlOanFhxilOViUxHnZz1wNExJITyxJ zU5NLUgtgskycXBKNTAGNxq53dbjrtEWmOd9e3LVzAzNVauYv236t1XPfdrtiKRWa48r6rfL tVeas4Syv138/eDrA0m+U8U4dxjsYbsRX84SaWt6g8X/h01yLlOU3R7vg+9rT8YkWYesS+I2 b317ySaSR/L1vKLPeyRetLeoaRmkl207zmtX8l1TJDF1/plduQ2zJimxFGckGmoxFxUnAgDX 6f+YAwMAAA==
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/captive-portals/ekYWf3rPwq6aO9Fh4LTyb5GH5G0>
Cc: "captive-portals@ietf.org" <captive-portals@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [Captive-portals] Comments on draft-nottingham-capport-problem-00
X-BeenThere: captive-portals@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
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, 03 Mar 2016 13:24:39 -0000

>On 3 March 2016 at 13:02, Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net> wrote:
>> Regarding notifications, I think we should discuss whether it's useful
>>to consider them as 'captive portals' or not. The techniques are similar
>>in many cases, but there are some important differences.
>
>I caution that this might be a case where we have to watch scope.  It
>might be good to understand the methods and reasons, but those
>differences could lead us down a rathole.

Fair concern. But we may not want the WG to be overly exclusive at this
early stage as to future implementations. I say that especially since at
least this operator would love to find better and more standardized
methods to do notifications using output from this WG that may fall into a
grey area between a captive portal and semi-captive portal (or however we
choose to label it) - it addition to improving Œclassic¹ captive portals
as defined here.

Jason

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email