IETF Logo Mail Archive

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

"Martin Thomson" <mt@lowentropy.net> Mon, 22 July 2019 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 795041200DE for <captive-portals@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 22 Jul 2019 15:54:20 -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=FGbLiEEg; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=messagingengine.com header.b=A0E81obh
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 5wQNxJOnfPYO for <captive-portals@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 22 Jul 2019 15:54:19 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from wnew3-smtp.messagingengine.com (wnew3-smtp.messagingengine.com [64.147.123.17]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id EEA7F1200B9 for <captive-portals@ietf.org>; Mon, 22 Jul 2019 15:54:18 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from compute1.internal (compute1.nyi.internal [10.202.2.41]) by mailnew.west.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1653D43E; Mon, 22 Jul 2019 18:54:18 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from imap2 ([10.202.2.52]) by compute1.internal (MEProxy); Mon, 22 Jul 2019 18:54:18 -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=HXN62YTh+ePZmf8naX48N+nnDqb7 0swW13HVEBaiUN4=; b=FGbLiEEggjZRh/oyUtuG+Pz7Bx45dB6l8oRL75bJYTuB aI83rGU8RlPhCQgP4KD9kWLtpQaGY1uoFkRpejRf6SvMjz226d3MLzPtAawTxVuC fBFaUag3txK7jhKxr/cOEwMscRKoNnRXd2cO8c2Ybkzwbuf1eYLiV5YTDIRkBu3k jFg0/8B4lAj56c7D2CkNijk84jCdvOPj7lUcTTzcjlU6zfMiybvC8GZ2SGgamGYL nt+Ez9HdetWUGzZaBsLaiX7rO3juKgU0fTQcJRMo5jJ95vJtm5zSR/dwROuwpzFW WPluG2vxtcuCCS5pzVChuctyqu8HWfD1RgZUd6Tscw==
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=HXN62Y Th+ePZmf8naX48N+nnDqb70swW13HVEBaiUN4=; b=A0E81obhzebeizW3Vy3aGO Wj0xMngNcBNPnPiQqZ01j0NqNyETrx2OlO03tk4MrMBHQQi62r8hblIfiJa/Qghg suFo5VIYFVWy/Sa4mZt4sT2WdOrf9dHyycUpnDH1ub4WHNvp4rxqNUSt2lKXQ4U8 dqgWMsegpg9xYzHTy583HxIXMoqG3mSqIgMzFzXt0L/HZj9wOEJffV96x2GZPfsk ls3EZailNGOLUGULggoi0kKRVtBsM3Nt62J5lHeBqWEUBerFJdnR1y3CCsiq7AuO p2TYbCnxv0pYbnYz1exzZtYZQnH17KvZ/hO1m5TXJGF/qYOqALwIifNjbA6VgYFA ==
X-ME-Sender: <xms:mT42Xcm0-Weq9bm9ls_vNpe2tuExPO-AIOVTgF_v5dxN-_DV4Qr6vg>
X-ME-Proxy-Cause: gggruggvucftvghtrhhoucdtuddrgeduvddrjeehgddugecutefuodetggdotefrodftvf curfhrohhfihhlvgemucfhrghsthforghilhdpqfgfvfdpuffrtefokffrpgfnqfghnecu uegrihhlohhuthemuceftddtnecusecvtfgvtghiphhivghnthhsucdlqddutddtmdenuc fjughrpefofgggkfgjfhffhffvufgtsehttdertderredtnecuhfhrohhmpedfofgrrhht ihhnucfvhhhomhhsohhnfdcuoehmtheslhhofigvnhhtrhhophihrdhnvghtqeenucfrrg hrrghmpehmrghilhhfrhhomhepmhhtsehlohifvghnthhrohhphidrnhgvthenucevlhhu shhtvghrufhiiigvpedt
X-ME-Proxy: <xmx:mT42XfDf55LinnewAYVIBRwXlBNB_E49dK2mQzniGwpHvxN41QTelA> <xmx:mT42XWwVhuxxTfdxTGfrW_AJMjgK0TPvXt--Bs0GPBfJ-FcynnvhqA> <xmx:mT42XTArrhbaVkgjU0_cKWlZWVGm6x4D-Ycmzflp9qZcv8xMGCnBbw> <xmx:mT42XV6h-fgUXx6ztmQxr_-88Vu13gji64iygnjLj9UPKRWITW6CyiqrqKg>
Received: by mailuser.nyi.internal (Postfix, from userid 501) id 516FBE0129; Mon, 22 Jul 2019 18:54:17 -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: <5c2c171e-bf3a-4f1a-946c-8dee5227c014@www.fastmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAKD1Yr08LmfDhmDLqpR87iQQ4Z61CVpR9BTDeRHobpsvVxFJvA@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAKD1Yr32DXr8fYHP_x7z9pQWwSchey8zQW11vw02bW9ONEV8Kg@mail.gmail.com> <01ad5bf0-1f60-4dbb-aa83-31d14fce6082@www.fastmail.com> <CAKD1Yr08LmfDhmDLqpR87iQQ4Z61CVpR9BTDeRHobpsvVxFJvA@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 22 Jul 2019 18:54:16 -0400
From: Martin Thomson <mt@lowentropy.net>
To: Lorenzo Colitti <lorenzo@google.com>
Cc: captive-portals@ietf.org
Content-Type: text/plain
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/captive-portals/hSP90Givl0G2FhdLZv8zF8g6CNw>
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: Mon, 22 Jul 2019 22:54:20 -0000

On Mon, Jul 22, 2019, at 17:43, Lorenzo Colitti wrote:
> It's possible to use HTTPS to IP literals. But IP literals are 
> address-family specific. That makes it impossible to support this 
> option in a dual-stack network because the two URLs will be different.

Just relaying a comment from someone who knows more about this than I: it would be reasonable to regard the v4 and v6 access as different "networks".  You can see how that might work when you consider that the configuration for v4 and v6 are different and could provide different answers.  I don't know how that fits with the logical model proposed in PvD though...

> One option would just be to drop this mechanism. If it is clear that 
> the DHCP / RA solutions are feasible in real networks, I don't see much 
> of a need for the link rel version at all.

Maybe this is something we could ask the WBA folks.  One nice property of that is that it fits into the 3xx interception nicely, but we're speculating here about whether this added simplicity would be useful.

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email