Re: [Secauth] Closing SecAuth list

[Alan DeKok <[e-mail]>]

On Jan 13, 2015, at 11:30 AM, Kathleen Moriarty <[e-mail]> wrote:
> This is only one of the three problems being discussed and there isn't
> enough to go forward on yet.  I'm asking that those interested go back
> and collect thoughts to devise feasible options.  If this is the
> problem selected, I would also need to see support from those who can
> make the change (organizations running the wifi hotspots).  I don't
> see the motivation for them to switch from using a captive portal,
> especially since they charge for use of the infrastructure they
> host/provide.

  I’ve worked with hotspots && providers for a long time.  Many have ads on their captive portal.  That being said, they make their money off of traffic, not landing pages.  They don’t care *how* people log in.  The WiFi alliance has worked on ways for people to automatically log in to hotspots.

  But I don’t understand how secauth helps them.  The problem statements are unclear.  The solutions are vast and vague.

>  I understand this is an issue for users, but also see
> that the problem is bigger and involves providers of the service (who
> have not been participating in the discussion).

  It will be hard to get hotspot providers to get involved in the IETF.  They’re working with the WiFi alliance, and even then very few of them are involved.

  This is a larger problem with the IETF.  Getting *production* people involved is hard.

> Is it worth it for those interested to get together on a single
> problem and come back with a more clearly defined scope?  If so, it
> would be great to see that happen and to see some of the concerns
> addressed by getting involvement/support of service providers.

  I agree.

  Alan DeKok.