[ Date Index ] [ Thread Index ] [ <= Previous by date / thread ] [ Next by date / thread => ]
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 On 13/06/13 22:37, Simon Waters wrote: > Clearly the DHCP standard needs modification to flag captive > portal, rather than different vendors hacking in different methods > at unrelated layers above, which sounds like a recipe for ever > more broken service. Ideally you'd want DHCP to indicate "needs authentication to send datagrams through the gateway" together with a mechanism to perform the authentication. The latter removing the requirement for a web browser (let along a web browser configured in a certain way.) With the software to do this being potentially possible on devices which could not possibly support a web browser. > > Unlikely to be an original idea that... So a google gave this... > > http://revk.www.me.uk/2012/12/damn-wifi-captive-portals.html > > There is a load of Radius stuff for this sort of stuff, but it > seems to be concerned with the wrong layer (e.g. authorising DHCP > when people have connected their modem over a serial link and > authenticated correctly, not quite the WIFI scenario). 802.1x also dosn't appear that useful in practice here either. -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.10 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with undefined - http://www.enigmail.net/ iEYEARECAAYFAlG7TykACgkQsoRLMhsZpFc/tQCfQ59+/ZJJuDs+KZTI+dImaF/l JkIAn2tmNxYNKvQmvlfyEdM84wNifkzc =OP3c -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- -- The Mailing List for the Devon & Cornwall LUG http://mailman.dclug.org.uk/listinfo/list FAQ: http://www.dcglug.org.uk/listfaq