Re: [Captive-portals] A final check on draft-ietf-capport-architecture-09

Erik Kline <ek.ietf@gmail.com> Tue, 01 September 2020 06:17 UTC

Return-Path: <ek.ietf@gmail.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 D46153A0C66 for <captive-portals@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 31 Aug 2020 23:17:23 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.097
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.097 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, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, 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=gmail.com
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 BYIScxAilLAB for <captive-portals@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 31 Aug 2020 23:17:22 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-ot1-x32a.google.com (mail-ot1-x32a.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::32a]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 476C03A0C62 for <captive-portals@ietf.org>; Mon, 31 Aug 2020 23:17:22 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-ot1-x32a.google.com with SMTP id u25so216028otq.6 for <captive-portals@ietf.org>; Mon, 31 Aug 2020 23:17:22 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=ejYuxIXaZw30WUIPlLQvi0obA7tf0WfNjZu6zR5gJMw=; b=lWvn9MscqxNPZrMD4wWYPxNLbxGr0onpbFa5FXwv2mnhc4avQZb9xIZsRporzyVzok T/wmIQuLCZffO9nx9Dt2aHxF+jK1+xMZx0SLDPNi5Ic0SyaEh/1WoeGK+GHtatu2XdRa BnWKZ+eHJmcH8huyE0LRBdV8jpY7d6Pah7gdnNA5DEfQWYDWXKHiwIvCdALw7tC0Oqk3 abcrGYhBWPMdEyZTEtRVoeuwyKAq5eNdfbqJdWz+V7I0fLVR/YCCknzVWjF5dB7R/NbF +tRrH523KJJe8qH8BwfdZ48KXjX8tqw3bUCewsk6V8QHJWMOrm52szASvlEtFoCguUuw s0kw==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=ejYuxIXaZw30WUIPlLQvi0obA7tf0WfNjZu6zR5gJMw=; b=jzSf0SQ5w6J4MuruDmwRM0PjhyF2xzE/ZXjHVS6jg8E4YZkuIXB7hYj3a1hZzSidvw ykrLwCmoqxpXxUF6csIrPIO0g/M2F//5g+8ZWirKx7lK6rStPHEH+7Z2Bolg+UIFbUJH 8dz4oMbq6//yW5q3vxRlsB48qxs3EQAo5inwQbVcZo3lObSJo+scO4RdhdFOXME6xmbt 30HGIv5POWYsBMTKPodmWVrx9T9NWo/1Ir2yxHGSRvKYfjLt6lCuNJ94nQ7NV+DWOUzT uY94uWty+hg/BCIJzF2Uq9EOPYT1WKwyYPlVyEc4dGFUXulSoG2LjDwACVsX2arQOJUa S7Gw==
X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM5314ZBzW6o5T7qMX9evw9M4eGjnBc0pHKY2kAIg9UdUmHOfBgj0I LrK9i1bPZZWvuu5jtFGv0lEKJJRzVeVmNgxRFmo=
X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJxsmw50vBPk+npjTXhr6lLce7PY/QYS4SWcsBjfCws8zBA5CH1ZmeTcK/cwEzU46ls8ix1dL0iJKOH6pfFdzLQ=
X-Received: by 2002:a05:6830:1db5:: with SMTP id z21mr337576oti.144.1598941041546; Mon, 31 Aug 2020 23:17:21 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <b666d3af-fcf6-4534-be01-7e7441d0d6d2@www.fastmail.com> <CAMGpriXiwEWov__Ha+-t0vTiJnOCob=bpu_d2bqTV=8UwWq-_w@mail.gmail.com> <ee697b4d-ec77-4f15-804e-afc2f9c93b3d@www.fastmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <ee697b4d-ec77-4f15-804e-afc2f9c93b3d@www.fastmail.com>
From: Erik Kline <ek.ietf@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 31 Aug 2020 23:17:10 -0700
Message-ID: <CAMGpriWytst1Ju8ucVhYidj5x33YtCiQT9WmP6_E1c3sK0kHzQ@mail.gmail.com>
To: Martin Thomson <mt@lowentropy.net>
Cc: captive-portals <captive-portals@ietf.org>, Warren Kumari <warren@kumari.net>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="000000000000cc590b05ae3a789e"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/captive-portals/ssvy9i2qc6tgORBMHjKVl8aSuSk>
Subject: Re: [Captive-portals] A final check on draft-ietf-capport-architecture-09
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: Tue, 01 Sep 2020 06:17:24 -0000

Warren and I had discussed whether {it would suffice for there to be /
there needs to be} an ops draft somewhere that says "if you see these
things upstream, replicate them downstream (unless you somehow know
better)".

DNS and NTP servers might be in this set.  7710bis would definitely be in
this set.

On Mon, Aug 31, 2020 at 10:43 PM Martin Thomson <mt@lowentropy.net> wrote:

> These cases, along with the very common case of a router that is
> on-premises and sits between an ISP and a local network, were discussed,
> but I don't recall ever reaching a conclusion.
>
> On Tue, Sep 1, 2020, at 15:28, Erik Kline wrote:
> > One thing I realized that we didn't discuss in 7710bis, and didn't
> > really discuss here either, is the issue of devices attached to routers
> > which are themselves on the link with the provisioning service.
> >
> > Such clients would not have a way to receive an RA option nor any of
> > the DHCP options since we didn't say what routers that observe these on
> > a network should do (e.g. routers should/may include verbatim the
> > 7710bis options in any of the applicable mechanisms for downstream
> > clients).
> >
> > The section 2.5 captive portal signal might be able to come to the
> > rescue here, but as we don't have such a thing.
> >
> > But...maybe that's a separate document?
> >
> > On Sun, Aug 9, 2020 at 5:11 PM Martin Thomson <mt@lowentropy.net> wrote:
> > > The editors of draft-ietf-capport-architecture have put in a huge
> amount of work over the past few weeks in addressing the review comments.
> > >
> > > https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-capport-architecture-09
> > >
> > > As there have been quite a few changes, I would like to request that
> people take a brief look again before we proceed.  I've been watching
> closely, and the changes look good, but I would like to confirm.  The
> changes are:
> > >
> > >
> https://tools.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=draft-ietf-capport-architecture-09.txt
> > >
> > > Please send comments before 2020-08-16.
> > >
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > Captive-portals mailing list
> > > Captive-portals@ietf.org
> > > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/captive-portals
> > _______________________________________________
> > Captive-portals mailing list
> > Captive-portals@ietf.org
> > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/captive-portals
> >
>
> _______________________________________________
> Captive-portals mailing list
> Captive-portals@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/captive-portals
>