Hi Jason, Thanks for that, I've made some edits; see: https://github.com/mnot/I-D/commit/950dcd04dfbb
Regarding notifications, I think we should discuss whether it's useful to consider them as 'captive portals' or not. The techniques are similar in many cases, but there are some important differences. Cheers, > On 3 Mar 2016, at 11:16 AM, Livingood, Jason <[email protected]> > wrote: > > Good document overall. Some comments/suggestions to consider for a 01 > update. > > 2.0, consider extending (IN CAPS): > ³...before allowing broader (but not necessarily complete) Internet > access, OR FOR OTHER PURPOSES.² > > 2.0, consider adding techniques to include HTML injection, Internet > Content Adaptation Protocol (RFC 3507), and the method described in RFC > 6108. > > 2.1, Information or Notifications, some possible additional examples: > security alerts, critical service information, account status, usage status > > 3.0, consider adding: > HTML injection, such as methods using ICAP, which runs counter to the > preferences of some users. > > 3.0, Feel free to take a look at the text in Section 12 of RFC 6108 and > use some of that text. You got the gist of it in the Non-Browser Clients > sub-section though (https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc6108#section-12) > > Regards > Jason > -- Mark Nottingham https://www.mnot.net/ _______________________________________________ Captive-portals mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/captive-portals
