Support for Hotspot wifi captive portal via RFC 8910 and RFC 8908
-
Ps: we could add in the same script the "legacy" hotspot detection (on top of the RFC8010 detection) based on make a dummy http request on a dummy URL, and it could allow have a large compatibility to detect most hotspot portals on the market.
-
A thought imposes itself though: why Network Manager is not already handling this by itself ?
Someone of course already had this idea.. A merge-request attempt followed that got quietly forgotten as happens all too often.
Note that in the issue description there is mention that in the favourite all devouring monster systemd there is something related. I did not follow up to see if systemd is not already providing it. I'd suggest you could do it though
If there is nothing useful in systemd, since network-manager seems a bit stranded (no release since mid 2024), possibly you could submit your change as a merge request in the UT version of it.
Disclaimer: as you know well I'm sure, this is not official advice of the Ubuntu Touch project with which I have no relationship.
-
Yes but, that being said on desktop this feature is not as important as on mobile. Even in windows the portal does not open automatically, and it's handled browser-side. So on desktop it seems more "OK" not to have this feature system-side.
On Ubuntu Touch given that Morph does not handle at all captive portal internally, it seems to me very important to be able to open it automatically. I've seen several users complaining of not being able to use networks with captive portals, and even cited as one of the reasons they can't use it as a daily driver. (Example here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HjfwyMuLnPo&t=475s )
I will look at the pull request you mentioned, thanks! Ps: Ha but it was not a merge request it was just an issue wasn't it?
-
on desktop this feature is not as important as on mobile
I did not say that the feature was useless, what I was meaning is that when there is already a feature upstream it's not the best idea of reinventing it unless there is good reason that the upstream wheel don't fit the use case.
In fact upstreaming (when it makes sense) is in the UT COC, so somehow maintainers are supposed to think of that.
it's handled browser-side
Hum, I did not even think of that. If Google has absorbed the idea in its gigantic browser, it could trickle in QT browser engine. That's another case where it could be better not to use a specific UT implementation.
it was not a merge request it was just an issue
it was an issue but there is a MR linked (look under 'Development'). The idea is that it's a generic feature, not something specific to Ubuntu Touch. After all, mobile is far from a remote consideration for so called 'desktop' environments such as Kde and Gnome.
-
The idea is that it's a generic feature, not something specific to Ubuntu Touch.
Well yes and no. It is a generic feature to detect option 114 and make the request to the API. BUT It is an OS sepcific feature to decide how you are going to display the captive portal. Here I display it using urlDispatcher via DBus that is an UT-specific feature that could hardly be upstreamed. Android has it's own mini-browser designed exclusively to display captive portal.
So this is kind of hard to have a generic way to handle captive portals in all OS that embed NetworkManager, independenty of the OS specifics. And all the existing OS (Android, iOS, Windows, MacOS) handle captive portal each, their own way.
I don't think in that regard UT should limit itself to what is availiable upstream, i.e keep basic things not working and not implemented, while it requires a 20 line script to have things running fine. If some day NetworkManager improve it's implementation, it will allways be time to use it then.
-
-
I've made a pull request here:
https://gitlab.com/ubports/development/core/hybris-support/lxc-android-config/-/merge_requests/184
-
@pparent so if I dump this script into the network manager scripts dir, it will Just Work
? -
Yes!
Use the latest script from my PR:
Make sure to make it executable (chmod +x) and reboot before testing
-
it is an OS sepcific feature to decide how you are going to display the captive portal.
now you have seen the reaction to your MR
Quote from Gitlab:
I have a deep interest in captive portal as a feature being also available to other distros (such as pmOS or Mobian) -
-
@pparent so I was not able to get this script or app to work. Is there something I should look for in the logs?
-
With the latest version of the script you need to install this app first:
https://github.com/pparent76/Captiveviewer-UT/releases/tag/0.1.0
Then install the latest version of the script, and chmod +x the script, and reboot
Then you should get a notification when you connect to a wifi with captive portal, and if you click the notification it will open the captive portal app.
-
Ok I had to fix ownership and perms on the script. Portal app loads, but not the portal itself. But that's not the fault of the portal app.
-
What do you mean, do you get the notification when you connect to the wifi network with captive portal?
(You should not open the app from the app grid, it is useless, it will open when you click on the notification, in the notification panel, like in the video)
-
@pparent yeah I got the notification and opened the app from it. But i couldn't load the page. But I think that it's a problem with my network configuration.
-
Ok well I don't know, are you testing with a specific wifi network with captive portal? Does it support RFC 8910 and RFC 8908, or is it legacy? Did you try with other wifi networks?
Ps: You can also retry with mobile data disabled, sometimes it's better.
-
Ok well I don't know, are you testing with a specific wifi network with captive portal? Does it support RFC 8910 and RFC 8908, or is it legacy? Did you try with other wifi networks?
Ps: You can also retry with mobile data disabled, sometimes it's better.
Disabling mobile data didn't help. The app receives the captive portal URL, but I get connection refused. I don't think this has anything to do with the captive portal helper. I thought it might be uAdblock, but seems no. So, no idea. I also have no idea if the captive portal is RFC or legacy.
-
Hello! It looks like you're interested in this conversation, but you don't have an account yet.
Getting fed up of having to scroll through the same posts each visit? When you register for an account, you'll always come back to exactly where you were before, and choose to be notified of new replies (either via email, or push notification). You'll also be able to save bookmarks and upvote posts to show your appreciation to other community members.
With your input, this post could be even better 💗
Register Login