IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [Captive-portals] [Doh] Captive portals (was Re: suggested slides for IETF 104 on draft-reid-doh-operator)

Thomas Peterson <hidinginthebbc@gmail.com> Fri, 15 March 2019 12:22 UTC

Return-Path: <hidinginthebbc@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 828BA131221; Fri, 15 Mar 2019 05:22:24 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_PASS=-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 5yAosNDUZuCE; Fri, 15 Mar 2019 05:22:23 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-wm1-x32d.google.com (mail-wm1-x32d.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::32d]) (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 08714130E62; Fri, 15 Mar 2019 05:22:23 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-wm1-x32d.google.com with SMTP id e16so5910664wme.1; Fri, 15 Mar 2019 05:22:22 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=subject:cc:references:from:to:message-id:date:user-agent :mime-version:in-reply-to:content-transfer-encoding:content-language; bh=eYa7evyZJ7LyoIONTGCJ3o68XWbaFYDNCu2Fo6fzzDo=; b=RN0KcJnCpWglS1n/divHFfj67k2sqiGYoC0cH2AvHEVA/f9U0PigD7MTZp3ThyA59I ezWNHIo/r0EN8OY/ukSzy62y6sW5ac4Waw/hYCRDwd3CjYAPNp9pRTDgU/fgkIzRojNJ JClUejeIN+PggRB3A9RqCylg8A9pG/vtsXuiA11Ggv0KOpB1oHJPyUCK/jXGw5dPOx9T aw7lFabrqA+JqhhV06SLJRIylDoM2p/Cfifs+bthOOwdY7WTiNVY2tGbfI59/IXOCilU DaCOmjH+Ee899c+jI1U5uyVAVqh/e9F/i3nDX70OJpHsulxLmOsmLoaajUcbjrhdTfJA G0ZQ==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:subject:cc:references:from:to:message-id:date :user-agent:mime-version:in-reply-to:content-transfer-encoding :content-language; bh=eYa7evyZJ7LyoIONTGCJ3o68XWbaFYDNCu2Fo6fzzDo=; b=fgjtvnGZBb0vj/4ryf86wFdhAamC9qNgJ8cwz4meyyay2b7H8nXT5+Ak6Y3b+ZBG1J JbENZA2pzXNbIxNy41thwLeBLC94QrRlTfGAlXVnFQWt7SjnNugEodIsQG1lh5lJHw2r PT+k4w0E2UiS5O09CHfgPHDLYYQdVkB8mho4bWpr2nQgHOU+iBIhRJJuP/3gM0vHr6xv UnGhBddAPlOXeaSCv5LLaKVvD791Y8XZuKIezp3JKJVuK4M/VNCXFuWt2skeH7CqhALY vNTaYn37cn/k1Cel9Nj8yPCg8CsqUpXnYYh4PITqhPAak+f2aBtmmGBgtAylxbaMAfzI nMfg==
X-Gm-Message-State: APjAAAVMHI+jtE2ozEZezlW6lt42liNTtGnX2Q/3sHFmAITJ/PrOHowf vvlZSjLoxHSKf6QV2ebVJ5RTdYNf
X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqxOxIkQ7SSLB6+I/FHcqsKlHmXdEKkDe6L11OFIl4cZwidcSBiRpeEX/MI2SY7v9ZXzFaHBfA==
X-Received: by 2002:a7b:c5c3:: with SMTP id n3mr2058477wmk.82.1552652541184; Fri, 15 Mar 2019 05:22:21 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ROADKILL.local ([132.185.158.35]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id v20sm7536402wmj.2.2019.03.15.05.22.19 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Fri, 15 Mar 2019 05:22:20 -0700 (PDT)
Cc: captive-portals@ietf.org
References: <A0E89D03-9D2D-462F-88F4-11824AC9A523@rfc1035.com> <0fce90e8-38ef-4503-8e52-0ef8c8d87f64@www.fastmail.com> <9B23961D-8D05-462C-A444-0139B354F171@rfc1035.com> <0c060e21-c1a4-4768-9fad-27ac85da391f@www.fastmail.com>
From: Thomas Peterson <hidinginthebbc@gmail.com>
To: doh@ietf.org
Message-ID: <ffe718fd-c7dc-d004-dfeb-4769780f5d50@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 15 Mar 2019 12:22:19 +0000
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.14; rv:60.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/60.5.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <0c060e21-c1a4-4768-9fad-27ac85da391f@www.fastmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"; format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Language: en-GB
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/captive-portals/tTePxDCWWBIACxmzQYSRrvkEjRc>
Subject: Re: [Captive-portals] [Doh] Captive portals (was Re: suggested slides for IETF 104 on draft-reid-doh-operator)
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: Fri, 15 Mar 2019 12:22:25 -0000

(to those exclusively on the captive-portals list, this email follows on 
a discussion around a presentation discussing implications of DNS over 
HTTP in networks where captive portals are present)

On 15/03/2019 11:26, Martin Thomson wrote:
> If the OS catches the captive portal, everything works nicely once the captive portal is dealt with.  If the captive portal manages to evade detection...

As there are numerous folk from browser and OS vendors within this 
mailing list who implement capture portal detection, would there benefit 
in authoring an informational document covering capture portal detection 
methods in the absence of a network's DHCP service not implementing RFC 
7710? Such a document may help describe common methods to inform 
implementers and minimise detection evading capture portals. It may be 
better placed in the capport WG instead of doh.

Regards

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email