IETF Logo Mail Archive

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

David Bird <dbird@google.com> Mon, 07 March 2016 17:36 UTC

Return-Path: <dbird@google.com>
X-Original-To: captive-portals@ietfc.amsl.com
Delivered-To: captive-portals@ietfc.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfc.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8CFB01CD662 for <captive-portals@ietfc.amsl.com>; Mon, 7 Mar 2016 09:36:11 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -0.801
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.801 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfc.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=google.com
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.41]) by localhost (ietfc.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 6wrHlpVeRpUo for <captive-portals@ietfc.amsl.com>; Mon, 7 Mar 2016 09:36:10 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-vk0-x231.google.com (mail-vk0-x231.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:400c:c05::231]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfc.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 5349A1CD668 for <captive-portals@ietf.org>; Mon, 7 Mar 2016 09:36:10 -0800 (PST)
Received: by mail-vk0-x231.google.com with SMTP id e185so125349994vkb.1 for <captive-portals@ietf.org>; Mon, 07 Mar 2016 09:36:10 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc; bh=EMl7d1HN40u/4co5F8W4sNpozvBa4WLRHR49EYE1qDk=; b=dxyQDRlFUp2dCFE60idALigNRw0bXqtJG0u6DNLXWWear5AOQQmhPMr8PzOXG4gO+l nrxt054eIc/z974vm9qu8WU1ioT6NBpYfbRcrjxDafRpHDl0WA2QbA3WF9HjluX4Bh29 GJZL6j7HzbuO3uw5s6x4MSJ8nS88+ZEUCA4rELQUj7Ez1AOo0gky41OZppDfyfdlN3mn eeE2PSOJU+DX6aGpG/lxdbygZOvdgI1LvNH0jFfMHHSSvT0wdL1X7UJ/aOTxQ26mXpKA UK4xiqw4+85JiyigvECVU1z1hcDpWo9IPu1AtBCl7tlIkkCVGcfQ6Bu2oT40ZJhd90KN Wkjg==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date :message-id:subject:from:to:cc; bh=EMl7d1HN40u/4co5F8W4sNpozvBa4WLRHR49EYE1qDk=; b=Dhmpa2sZYH3eOLkw/MdgtY/XiwNOKuiLUCx5vD+iksRIG2BEzoYdCRRvq3UObF07M5 /PVVhiuCN2CLUs8hzO/b+iObhzpVAFt197Va0X4RKc17r19v9OyT9ycOBCMEbPgrp1yZ NQBylURtGjsRX1rtlBtFjZD+6ibPG/V5rL6AaNzJqDXCOGBUE2476kONPefOBKdUOhkI Z5+JZkBgGGFKO6YBCorq8mGaF2H2Q0pChfoazBh1YlU+mzbYR4keaheBwVfAehMyGBb3 pAQORjS6V8S4PWktoHBWH6BXxUCDB7oSW96z6sWbBUIfAtWLcLucIWi2sqyii9BuEOlB iOow==
X-Gm-Message-State: AD7BkJKtPQKKL+mZ8bqsiDw+uw7XiWRr1dDloVBbPxNvkbssSFpGEoHzE2Nrc+9iHdhd6+tGsTM3ZurjpY+geYow
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Received: by 10.31.194.10 with SMTP id s10mr22086708vkf.72.1457370295237; Mon, 07 Mar 2016 09:04:55 -0800 (PST)
Received: by 10.159.37.42 with HTTP; Mon, 7 Mar 2016 09:04:55 -0800 (PST)
In-Reply-To: <CADo9JyUZ7zored10YUocwzuNchQ6JB6664QiXpX23KbPrWX2HQ@mail.gmail.com>
References: <D2FCEB47.12A6DC%jason_livingood@cable.comcast.com> <CABkgnnV-Nbbt3Mkh-ZOzWig7rJX32SFugkWLnx-t94bA-B__Lw@mail.gmail.com> <E8355113905631478EFF04F5AA706E9830EBCAE6@wtl-exchp-2.sandvine.com> <D3030A8C.12AEFF%jason_livingood@cable.comcast.com> <20160307155423.1590733519F0@fafnir.remote.dragon.net> <CADo9JyUZ7zored10YUocwzuNchQ6JB6664QiXpX23KbPrWX2HQ@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 07 Mar 2016 09:04:55 -0800
Message-ID: <CADo9JyXuWwVVQuU=o_dWRsengcAV4CTkmn+Uie_MhqBDt1xZ1Q@mail.gmail.com>
From: David Bird <dbird@google.com>
To: Paul Ebersman <list-captive-portals@dragon.net>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="001a114661dcc19f4c052d78761d"
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/captive-portals/xcBnL8K1z1fDhA3SK2IdoTjEZoA>
Cc: "captive-portals@ietf.org" <captive-portals@ietf.org>, Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net>, Martin Thomson <martin.thomson@gmail.com>, Dave Dolson <ddolson@sandvine.com>
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: Mon, 07 Mar 2016 17:36:11 -0000

Sorry, link was to wrong version:
https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-wkumari-capport-icmp-unreach-01

On Mon, Mar 7, 2016 at 9:00 AM, David Bird <dbird@google.com> wrote:

> +1 for an ICMP solution ...
> https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-wkumari-capport-icmp-unreach-00
>
> On Mon, Mar 7, 2016 at 7:54 AM, Paul Ebersman <
> list-captive-portals@dragon.net> wrote:
>
>>
>> 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.
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Captive-portals mailing list
>> Captive-portals@ietf.org
>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/captive-portals
>>
>
>

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email