Martin Thomson <[email protected]> wrote:
> We've had a number of discussions in the captive portals group about
> fixing RFC 7710.
> Erik and I would like to propose a plan for that work. We would keep
> this to addressing the issues that we have identified thus far.
> Namely:
Hi, so are you considering 7710bis, or a document that just Updates 7710?
7710bis seems excessive to me, unless you think that we have to change the
DHCP/RA option codes in the process.
> 1. The purpose of the URI is not well defined. We would reference the
> capport architecture and API documents for that. The group would need
> to decide between: a. point to the API b. point to a login page
Could the API document do the required updates?
--
Michael Richardson <[email protected]>, Sandelman Software Works
-= IPv6 IoT consulting =-
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature