Re: [Captive-portals] Secdir last call review of draft-ietf-capport-rfc7710bis-04

2020-06-01 Thread Tommy Pauly
Hi Rifaat, Your comments make it clear that the recommendation to make the API server name visible isn’t necessarily clear. I think it’s not a harmful thing to show, as a way to give troubleshooting information and transparency to the user, but it is not a security-critical point. It seems app

Re: [Captive-portals] Secdir last call review of draft-ietf-capport-rfc7710bis-04

2020-06-01 Thread Rifaat Shekh-Yusef
On Sun, May 31, 2020 at 2:07 AM Erik Kline wrote: > On Wed, May 20, 2020 at 4:37 AM Rifaat Shekh-Yusef > wrote: > > > > Adding SecDir back to this thread. > > > > > > >Martin Thomson Tue, 19 May 2020 01:02 UTCShow > header > > > > > >On Tue, May 19, 2020, at 07:08, Rifaat Shekh-Yusef wrote: > >

Re: [Captive-portals] Murray Kucherawy's No Objection on draft-ietf-capport-rfc7710bis-07: (with COMMENT)

2020-06-01 Thread Michael Richardson
Murray Kucherawy via Datatracker wrote: > In Section 2, paragraph 2, it says the operator "SHOULD ensure that the URIs > provisioned by each method are equivalent". Does "equivalent" here mean > "identical", or just "synonymous"? {speaking as a WG member} synonymous, I think that