>On 3 March 2016 at 13:02, Mark Nottingham <[email protected]> wrote: >> 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. > >I caution that this might be a case where we have to watch scope. It >might be good to understand the methods and reasons, but those >differences could lead us down a rathole.
Fair concern. But we may not want the WG to be overly exclusive at this early stage as to future implementations. I say that especially since at least this operator would love to find better and more standardized methods to do notifications using output from this WG that may fall into a grey area between a captive portal and semi-captive portal (or however we choose to label it) - it addition to improving Œclassic¹ captive portals as defined here. Jason _______________________________________________ Captive-portals mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/captive-portals
