Hi Hubert, I can do the exercise but the result will be two sections totally decorrelated: one for TLS 1.3 and one for TLS 1.2. Two drafts in one document.
- The handshake phase in TLS 1.2 is different from handshake/TLS1.3 - The certificate type is different. One uses cert_type and the other uses extension defined in [RFC7250]. Kind Regards Mounira ----- Mail original ----- De: "Hubert Kario" <hka...@redhat.com> À: "tls" <tls@ietf.org> Cc: "Mounira Msahli" <mounira.msa...@telecom-paristech.fr>, "Ilari Liusvaara" <ilariliusva...@welho.com> Envoyé: Lundi 27 Août 2018 16:39:56 Objet: Re: [TLS] TLS 1.3 Authentication using ETSI TS 103 097 and IEEE 1609.2 certificates On Friday, 24 August 2018 19:44:36 CEST Mounira Msahli wrote: > - You should also specify use in TLS 1.2 in the same draft (or say that > is prohibited). This is so one only needs one reference for the > codepoint allocation. > > >>> It is not prohibited, for TLS 1.2 the extension is already specified: [ > >>> https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-serhrouchni-tls-certieee1609-01 ] > [ https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-serhrouchni-tls-certieee1609-01 | > https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-serhrouchni-tls-certieee1609-01 ] We will > update the draft wouldn't then it be better to combine them and have one standard (document) that describes use in TLS 1.2 and TLS 1.3? I may be missing something but I don't see anything that would prevent use of the same codepoints in both protocol versions -- Regards, Hubert Kario Senior Quality Engineer, QE BaseOS Security team Web: www.cz.redhat.com Red Hat Czech s.r.o., Purkyňova 115, 612 00 Brno, Czech Republic _______________________________________________ TLS mailing list TLS@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tls
