Re: [Captive-portals] Use Case: "Carrier Grade Captive Portal"

[Erik Kline <ek@google.com>]

(the 511 error page does not seem to be the worst variant.. if the user
sees an error in the browser
then the next reload puts him to the correct walled garden page)

Some observations, and questions for the working group.

I'm not sure we have enough input on whether 511 is useful or not.  There seemed to be some suggestion it would help, and some that it wouldn't.  Perhaps one question we could ask is whether it's harmful?  And if we agree it's not harmful, is it worth developing some recommendations for its use?

As for the ICMP unreachable option, I certainly don't think it would be harmful (with the extra URL bits removed for now).  Is that something we wish to progress?

Given that we're probably looking at a portal detection method based on entirely new work, it seems to me we're free to look at new things like utilizing the PVD detection scheme (DNS queries for "provisioning domain names", followed by other interaction still TBD).  Have the portal implementors reviewed this and given consideration as to whether its useful?  (I think of the discovery of the portal and subsequent interaction with it as 2 separate processes conducted, obviously, in serial.)

Thoughts?

Attachment: smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature