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

Re: [Captive-portals] [OPSAWG] putting quarantined IoT devices behind a captive portal



Juergen Schoenwaelder <[email protected]> wrote:
    > would an ICMP "administratively prohibited" not be a sufficient
    > signal? Sure, things can be made much more complex, but I doubt that
    > devices will try to actively investigate why they can't communicate

Probably good enough.  Some wanted a more specific signal.

It's intended to just be a signal to go ask the captive portal API
if the device is captive.

    > (and implement additional protocols for this) if all they can do at
    > the end is to change the color of an led or simply shut-off (i.e.,
    > stop assuming its a temporary network issue and reduce/stop probing
    > effort).

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



Attachment: signature.asc
Description: PGP signature