Re: [Cfrg] DNSSEC considering adopting GOST R 34.10-2001 and GOST R 34.11-94

[Eric Rescorla <ekr at networkresonance.com>]

At Tue, 28 Apr 2009 13:08:47 +0000,
bmanning at vacation.karoshi.com wrote:
> 
> On Tue, Apr 28, 2009 at 06:06:43AM -0700, Eric Rescorla wrote:
> > At Tue, 28 Apr 2009 10:26:07 +0400,
> > Basil Dolmatov wrote:
> > > 
> > > 
> > > 
> > > Paul Hoffman ?????:
> > > >
> > > Hi Paul,
> > > 
> > > > And herein lies a problem. The GOST specs are in Russian. I do not believe that there are any official English translations, 
> > > > and that the unofficial ones are expensive. (I would love to be wrong about either of those statements.) 
> > >  >I have Cc' the author of the relevant draft on this message so he can 
> > > help.
> > > 
> > > Because of expensiveness of existing translations I can only "lend" my 
> > > copies for the purpose of review by professionals, members of Cfrg, 
> > > provided these copies will never made publicly available on the Internet 
> > > or distributed by any other means to other people/enterprises except 
> > > those who have got it from me directly.
> > > 
> > > Those, who are willing to lend a copy can address me via e-mail.
> > 
> > Shouldn't reliance on a non-public spec pretty much be a dealbreaker
> > for standardization of an algorithm?
> > 
> > -Ekr
> 
> 	Please.  the spec is public.  Is there any rule in place that specifications
> 	must be available in ENGLISH to be considered publically available?

Given that the working language of the IETF is English, yes, I
think that's the sense of the rule.

-Ekr