Martin Duke has entered the following ballot position for draft-ietf-capport-api-07: No Objection
When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all email addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free to cut this introductory paragraph, however.) Please refer to https://www.ietf.org/iesg/statement/discuss-criteria.html for more information about IESG DISCUSS and COMMENT positions. The document, along with other ballot positions, can be found here: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-capport-api/ ---------------------------------------------------------------------- COMMENT: ---------------------------------------------------------------------- This document is clearly written. Thanks. I am also confused by this sentence at the end of section 4.1 about failed authentication: “It may still be possible for the user to access the network by being redirected to a web portal.” I suggest “...access the network by redirecting a clear text webpage to a web portal.” I was a bit confused by the original wording. As I said in the architecture review, the term for the user portal keeps changing. Over there it’s called a “Captive Portal Server” and a “web portal server”. Here it’s a “user-portal.” The authors of the two docs should get together and agree on a term. One nit: s/extenal/external _______________________________________________ Captive-portals mailing list Captive-portals@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/captive-portals
