[PATCH 1/2] Client Taxonomy
apenwarr at google.com
Sun Aug 14 16:28:43 PDT 2016
On Sat, Aug 13, 2016 at 5:18 PM, Arran Cudbard-Bell
<a.cudbardb at freeradius.org> wrote:
>> On 11 Aug 2016, at 08:35, Johannes Berg <johannes at sipsolutions.net> wrote:
>> This being a fairly niche feature, perhaps it should get a build time
>> option so the code can be excluded? Even things almost everybody wants
>> like 11N have build time options, and this one seems to be much more
>> likely to not be desired in all builds. Thoughts?
> I think the techniques Avery described in his presentation (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yZcHbD84j5Y)
> are equally useful in Education, Enterprise and Carrier deployments and are not at all niche.
> If signature definitions were bundled, and the determination/confidence info were inserted into an attribute like
> Connect-Info (or a hostapd VSA - I’m sure Alan DeKok will comment on appropriate attribute usage), you’d
> see very widespread adoption and use. It’d represent an ultra low barrier to the sort of analysis Google are
> doing on their ISP network.
Although I agree that the feature is awesome, I also agree that not
everyone will want it, so it still makes sense to make it optional I
More information about the Hostap