Why not ping 8.8.8.8 or 1.1.1.1 or time.windows.com? Things that are actually designed to be highly available services
Is there any reason to believe captive.apple.com is any less "designed to be highly available" than time.windows.com?
It's a static page that every Apple device relies on saying only:
<HTML><HEAD><TITLE>Success</TITLE></HEAD><BODY>Success</BODY></HTML>
The only risk is that Apple hasn't announced it as being reliable or promised to keep it up or the format the same in any way. They could 100% pull it out from under everyone, with modifications in their OSes prepared for the change
Also some captive portals fake/emulate responses from this service.
1.1 is enough.
~$ ping -c1 1.1 PING 1.1 (1.0.0.1) 56(84) bytes of data. 64 bytes from 1.0.0.1: icmp_seq=1 ttl=56 time=7.89 ms --- 1.1 ping statistics --- 1 packets transmitted, 1 received, 0% packet loss, time 0ms rtt min/avg/max/mdev = 7.888/7.888/7.888/0.000 ms
Thanks! I'd forgotten that 1.1 and 1.1.1 resolve. I'll not infrequently ping 1.1.1.1.1 with overzealous typing. That will, alas, not resolve.
YET!
When did this start working? Did they backport IPv6-style addressing, or did I just never know this?
Is there any reason to believe captive.apple.com is any less "designed to be highly available" than time.windows.com?
It's a static page that every Apple device relies on saying only:
The only risk is that Apple hasn't announced it as being reliable or promised to keep it up or the format the same in any way. They could 100% pull it out from under everyone, with modifications in their OSes prepared for the change
Also some captive portals fake/emulate responses from this service.
1.1 is enough.
Thanks! I'd forgotten that 1.1 and 1.1.1 resolve. I'll not infrequently ping 1.1.1.1.1 with overzealous typing. That will, alas, not resolve.
YET!
When did this start working? Did they backport IPv6-style addressing, or did I just never know this?