Re: [Captive-portals] I-D Action: draft-ietf-capport-api-00.txt

[Lorenzo Colitti <lorenzo@google.com>]

On Tue, Feb 6, 2018 at 10:07 AM, David Bird <dbird@google.com> wrote:

Not really.  The way I understand it, the UE alters routing tables so
that only applications that explicitly opt in to using the interface
to the network can do so.  That state exists until the network is
given an "all clear".

I understand that. But, *really*, the application(s) that opt-in, as it were, are using the  network... DNS, HTTPS (to the API), etc. 

I'm not overly comfortable designing network protocols around, basically, UE limitations and easy of programming... The  UE *could* be more flexible...

You're splitting hairs here. The UE does not ban applications from using the captive network in the sense that applications can choose to use it if they wish to. One notable use case is applications whose goal is to log into captive portals automatically by leveraging existing credentials. So Martin's original statement could be worded as "UE vendors express a strong desire to be able to know about status before they inflict the network on apps that want Internet access".