The question that has been asked repeatedly by many projecters is: WiFi certification, why do you have to text? Can't you just use a micro-mail sweep or set a fixed password without texting?
The answer to this question is not in the technical selection table, but only when the project is audited, checked on a sample basis and complained by users.
First, let's say the premise. If WiFi is going to be certified for text messages, it's not a core judgement."It's not easy."But..."Do you want to be traced back?"A micromail may be a mobile phone number, or it might not be a cell number, and it may even be an undersigned virtual number. Public security audits are about to date natural persons, this line is drawn.Text message certification is the threshold.The mobile phone number is now in place for over a decade, and the text message authentication code confirms at least one fact: the person currently connected to WiFi does have this cell phone number.
If WiFi only uses it for internal staff, the employee has an LDAP account and a real name check at entry, SMS certification is not necessary. If it is a network open to the public, such as hotels, malls, airports, restaurants, it comes every day, mobile people, and without a ready-made identity account, SMS authentication can hardly be overtaken. The chain brands usually have clear audit pressure and compliance red lines, and if the individual residence only provides WiFi to residents and the occupants have registered IDs at the front desk, text message certification may be replaced by a back-up system.——This depends on local regulatory acceptance of this alternative.
Another key point: SMS authentication is not chosen"Do you want it?"It's a choice between one, but what position it is assigned to in the authentication system. It can be the main channel.——All users take SMS codes; it can be a back-to-back route.——The cost of the two locations varies greatly. The average daily amount of authentication is a fixed charge. The small but indispensable amount of access to the bottom line is equivalent to spending a controlled amount of money on keeping the compliance threshold.
The passageway is worth talking about alone. SMS service providers have fewer than a dozen, but the quality gap is not half a star. Some access rates are more than 99% and the code of certification arrives within three seconds. Others still do, sometimes with the package dropped at holiday or night peaks, and the code of authentication goes to the sea. WiFi certifies this scene, where users stand in the lobby, coffee hall or terminal, waiting for the connection to be connected, patientness is counted by seconds. Five minutes without the code, the user's judgment is simple:"This is a wimp.", without thinking about the SMS channel. So the route selection depends on at least three things: arrival rate, average arrival time, peak capacity.The sla in the passageway is more important than the unit price.And that's what many projects go online and they're tested with real silver.
There is also a real problem: SMS authentication is not isolated. It works in parallel with micro-letter authentication, MAC Seamless Authentication, APP certification is a combination and not an alternative relationship. V7 NATSHEL_AUTH_BILLING supports flexible presentation of multiple authentication methods, which can work alongside micro-mail scanning, one key login, etc. Ideally: free or unconscious authentication should be placed at the front end, text-messing certification at the bottom. For example, hotel scenes, default micro-mail clearances are used to be certified only by clicking on them."I don't have any messages."Or we can use the credit to send a message to a user who has failed to do so. This ensures that anyone can do it in some way and avoids having all users go through the SMS channel to charge costs.
And there's a dimension that is very much asked, but few answer it: SMS authentication and Portal page. SMS certification depends on Portal pop-up mechanisms, Portal doesn't come out, text message authentication won't be possible.——AC Portal's Portal protocol, terminal compatibility with HTTPS Portal, and whether there is a firewall or proxy to intercept Portal's request. Some projects Portal did not do it, but could not pop up on some equipment. For example, Apple has changed the compatibility of HTTP Portal from an iOS version, and if Portal's page is still HTTP, it doesn't go back to HTTPS without upgrading to iOS users. This issue is irrelevant for text message authentication itself, but it directly affects whether users can move to HTTP Portal."Enter your cell number."That step. If you choose to focus on the functionality of SMS authentication modules, not on the integrity and compatibility of Portal protocols, it is often not text-message channels that are stuck when deployed.
Back to the selection question. The answer is not a functional comparison table. It depends on three factors: whether the scene is internal or public, how stringent audit compliance is and whether the operating budget will hold up the cost of text messages. Three factors are clear, plus Portal compatibility and access SLA, which are both technically hard indicators that are identified, and the choice is naturally in the direction. Blind text messages may be unserviceable, and they may not be audited at all.It's more important to find a location than a tablet., because positioning determines the priority of all subsequent technical parameters and budget allocations.