[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [Captive-portals] [adoption call] draft-donnelly-capport-detection

Erik Kline <[email protected]> wrote:
    > As indicated in the minutes from Prague
    > [https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/minutes-99-capport/], there was a
    > general hum in favor of the API document:

    > """
    > 4. API document: do we need a milestone? Humming: in favor.
    > 5. Is this document a good basis. Humming in favor.
    > """"

    > This email is to initiate a two week call for adoption for:

    > https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-donnelly-capport-detection/

I like the approach, please adopt it.

After adoption, I think the WG should consider if describing the JSON in YANG
would make sense. I've been through this in netconf/anima/6tisch now, and
while it seems like a silly annoyance at first, it seems to have some
advantages in the long run.

Michael Richardson <[email protected]>, Sandelman Software Works
 -= IPv6 IoT consulting =-

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: PGP signature