On Tue, Feb 16, 2016 at 2:26 PM Michael Richardson <[email protected]> wrote:
> > Warren Kumari <[email protected]> wrote: > mcr> A good read, where are we going with this document? > > > Potentially no where -- it may or may not get published as an RFC, > but > > whatever the case, I've found it it be really helpful to have some > > thing like a problem statement document to make sure that everyone > > (newcomers and long time WG participants) are all working on the same > > page. > > Yes. I'd like to ask that we consider is step one of outreach, and that we > consider making 7-12 slides to explain captive portal risks to: > 1) marketing people. > 2) end-users > 3) computer programmers (not necessarily network people) > > Yup. One of the things that we've heard from multiple people is that they'd like a "survey of the industry" -a better understanding why operators deploy captive portals and also defeat the captive portal probes. We've heard a number of motivations for deploying a CP. These include: regulatory, AUP / legal protection, payment, advertising (eyeballs / "watch my 30 second ad video" / "Like me on Facebook for access"), only allowing employees / some other class). We've also heard a number of reasons for defeating the probe - mainly "In order to show my ad I need a fully featured browser" or "In order to have people like me on Facebook their browser needs access to their cookies". But, most of these have been anecdotal, mentioned in passing -- we'd appreciate it if someone wold be willing to take this on as a document. It would be great if the slide deck also asked marketing, end-users, operators, implementors, computer programmers, etc to participate and contribute to this document / discussions.... > I'm thinking of something that could be done as a quick talk at another > conference, such as a pycon or XYZ User Group. Or maybe a Youtube video a > la > Minute Physics. > > Yup, as above. > I'll probably take a cut at this, but it will only help if we it looks > good, > and I'm not in that category. > Having seen many IETF presentations, I suspect that most of us fall into that camp. :-) W > > -- > Michael Richardson <[email protected]>, Sandelman Software Works > -= IPv6 IoT consulting =- > > > > _______________________________________________ > Captive-portals mailing list > [email protected] > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/captive-portals >
_______________________________________________ Captive-portals mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/captive-portals
