Re: [TLS] A new draft for "Using Identity as Raw Public Key in Transport Layer Security (TLS)" has been updated

[Ilari Liusvaara <[e-mail]>]

On Thu, Jan 17, 2019 at 10:21:43AM +0000, Wang Haiguang wrote:
> Dear Ilari
> 
> Sorry for the late reply. 
> 
> We are now trying to move the TLS-IBC to TLS 1.3 and will upload a newer version soon.  
> 
> In your previous email, you said that with TLS 1.3, the client_certificate_type is unnessary.
> In fact client_certificate_type and server_certificate_type are defined in RFC 7250 and used in client/server hello to 
> indicate the preference of client/server one certificate. 
> 
> Client/server can use it to indicate whether they want to use RawPublicKey or X.509 in authentication. So if we do not 
> use client_certificate_type, how the client indicate its preference on RawPublicKey. 

Ugh, just noticed that the terminology is pretty confusing...

There are three similarly named things:

- Registry called ClientCertificateType (only used by TLS 1.2, these
  values go into one field in CertificateRequest message)
- extension called client_certificate_type (used by TLS 1.2&1.3)
- Registry called certificate types (values used by
  client_certificate_type come from here).



-Ilari