Skip to main content

AFRINIC · RIR Watchdog

AFPUB-2018-GEN-001-DRAFT07

Start here for the proposal-by-proposal record: what changed, why it mattered, who argued for what, how positions evolved, what was decided, and where the evidence still has gaps.

Source facts

Policy ID
AFPUB-2018-GEN-001-DRAFT07
RIR
AFRINIC
Official status
Ratified
Normalized status
Accepted
Introduced
May 17, 2021
Last source update
Oct 10, 2026
Coverage
Partial

Who actually shaped the debate?

1Total participants
UnknownDiscussion contributors
1Formal actors
UnknownDiscussion messages
UnknownEffective participants
UnknownTop-five discussion share
UnknownPeople covering 50%
UnknownPeople covering 80%

Policy evolution

1
Under discussion · Under Discussion
Aug 12, 2018
Source facts ↗

source representation · The retained source changes from a title-only Draft 1 capture to the full Draft 1 proposal and staff assessment. The comparison establishes added source detail, not a policy amendment between two policy texts.

2
Under discussion · Under Discussion
Nov 20, 2018
Source facts ↗

source representation · The retained source changes from a title-only Draft 2 capture to a full proposal page containing the draft text, revision history and staff assessment. The newly available detail should be treated as source enrichment rather than an inferred policy change.

3
Unknown · Archived
Jun 5, 2019
Source facts ↗

Coverage of directly assigned resources · Draft 3 explicitly applies the mandatory abuse-c contact to resources allocated or assigned by AFRINIC; Draft 2's operative wording referred to allocated resources. This clarifies the text's coverage of direct assignments rather than establishing that the proposal had already been implemented.

Response to failed abuse-contact validation · Draft 2 prescribed initial account blocking, except for contact updates, and release of the block after revalidation. Draft 3 replaces that fixed sequence with further follow-up, warnings and blocking of certain services at AFRINIC's discretion under the relevant policies and procedures. The new wording does not identify which services must be blocked.

Escalation mechanism in section 8.6 · Draft 3 retains escalation for fraudulent validation or inadequate abuse responses, but states the operative requirement as a method enabling revalidation. Draft 2 placed an example mailbox and possible AFRINIC intermediation or resource-revocation procedures in section 8.6 itself; Draft 3 moves implementation examples and those further actions to the additional-information procedure. This is a change in how the requirement is specified, not evidence that escalation ceased to exist.

Time limits in the illustrative validation procedure · The worked example in Draft 3 extends validation-code validity from two working days to 15 working days and the subsequent correction period from three business days to 15 business days. These changes belong to the example procedure; the section 8.4 objectives already specified initial and escalation periods of no more than 15 days in both drafts.

Automation and human validation · Draft 3 changes the validation objective from avoiding automated processing to avoiding exclusively automated processing. The distinction allows automation alongside the retained requirement for a person to understand the procedure and monitor the abuse mailbox.

IRT and abuse-c publication wording · Draft 3 describes the IRT publication relationship explicitly as an alias to abuse-c, where Draft 2 said the IRT would also be published as abuse-c. Both retain the aim of finding the same contact information through either name and preserving the remaining IRT information; neither passage demonstrates that the migration had occurred.

Ticket continuity in abuse correspondence · Draft 3 adds that a generated ticket number should be retained, typically in the subject, through successive communications. Draft 2 already described automatic reporting and optional initial ticket assignment but did not include this explicit continuity instruction in the corresponding passage.

Warnings in the illustrative follow-up procedure · Draft 3 adds explicit multi-channel warnings to the resource holder, including other mailboxes and alert pop-ups, with the policy text and consequences of continued non-compliance. It also says that blocking access to certain services should be considered in the example procedure. Draft 2 proceeded from its short correction window to repeated validation without this warning paragraph.

5
Unknown · Archived
Nov 22, 2019
Source facts ↗

Contact data model · Draft 5 clarifies that abuse-c is a mandatory attribute pointing to a person or role, with at least one monitored abuse mailbox. Draft 4 described a mandatory object and a contact in the corresponding WHOIS entry. This makes the reference structure more explicit; it does not create evidence of a completed WHOIS migration.

Contacts used when validation fails · The escalation recipient changes from other LIR contacts to other member contacts, and the surrounding implementation discussion similarly refers to members. The new wording is less tied to the LIR class. Both versions keep the second validation period at no more than 15 days; the text does not establish how many members were affected in practice.

Express enforcement sentence · The draft-4 sentence prescribing follow-up, warnings and discretionary service blocking after non-compliance is absent from draft 5's proposed section 8.5. The validation frequency and escalation-to-AFRINIC mechanism remain. The newer rationale expressly invokes database-accuracy obligations under the RSA, so this omission must not be treated as a waiver of separate RSA enforcement or proof that sanctions were abolished.

IRT transition and operational discretion · The earlier additional information promised an IRT alias or pointer to abuse-c. The newer draft says that, if consensus is reached, mnt-IRT must be renamed to abuse-c; AFRINIC chooses whether and how long to retain an alias and the IRT data, and how to update the guidelines. This replaces a specific transitional arrangement with more operational discretion, conditional on the proposal's approval.

6
Unknown · Archived
Aug 5, 2020
Source facts ↗

Validation wording and escalation contacts · Draft 6 changes confirmation that the resource holder understands the policy into confirmation that the holder has read it, with separate monitoring, action and response bullets. It also changes other member contacts back to other LIR contacts. Although its history calls the revision editorial improvements, those are observable wording differences; the latter should not be silently treated as identical coverage of all member categories.

New staff assessment and implementation constraints · The new page adds a dated staff assessment describing WHOIS, MyAFRINIC and registration-process changes, the initial compliance workload and potential staffing needs. It says the proposal's 90-day expectation cannot be met, estimates six months for systems work and twelve months for member compliance, and requests clarification about legacy resources. These are staff estimates and unresolved scope questions, not evidence of implementation or an amendment that automatically imposes those timelines.

Historical references and date uncertainty · The references now describe LACNIC as having accepted an equivalent proposal that was under implementation, and describe discussion in RIPE. These are the source's historical comparisons, not verified present-day implementation status. Draft 5's own history dates it to 22 November 2019, while draft 6's retrospective history says 21 November; that disagreement remains visible. Draft 6's dated assessment and later typo correction are separate from its 5 August 2020 draft date.

7
Accepted · Ratified
May 17, 2021
Source facts ↗

New operative slow-start provision · Draft 7 adds proposed section 8.7, expressly allowing yearly adjustment of initial and escalation periods and validation frequency in light of staffing, procedures and actual data, with reasons communicated to the community. Draft 6 discussed adjustable periods in Additional information but lacked this separate operative section. The change gives the gradual rollout an explicit policy basis; it is not proof that any particular extension was exercised.

Legacy resources, abuse definitions and enforcement boundaries · The new explanatory text says the proposal sets no different conditions for legacy holders, leaves non-compliance consequences to the RSA and leaves the definition of abuse and escalation beyond contact validation to participants and their local rules. It also asserts no additional GDPR impact. The earlier staff assessment expressly requested guidance on legacy applicability; the newer assessment lists no clarification requests. These statements clarify the author's intended scope and the assessment's position, but are not an independent legal determination or proof that every legacy resource was brought into compliance.

Rollout timing and financial assessment · The newer additional information illustrates an initial pass lasting 12–24 months and explicitly leaves implementation timing to AFRINIC's operations, priorities and staffing. Its revised staff assessment records no financial impact and a phased rollout, replacing the earlier assessment's extra-staff requirement and six-month systems/twelve-month compliance estimates. These remain proposal explanations and staff planning statements; they do not establish actual completion dates or a measured absence of cost.

Publication and adoption context · The newer retained page identifies DRAFT07, gives 17 May 2021 and labels the proposal Ratified, whereas the earlier retained page is an archived draft-6 page with a conflicting DRAFT01 header. The comparison follows the source-specific draft sequence. The Ratified label is evidence of the later page's stated status; it does not itself date a Board decision to the submission date or prove technical implementation.

8
Unknown · Archived
May 15, 2022
Source facts ↗

Renewal of proposal validity · Draft 8's revision history explicitly describes a version update without policy changes to extend validity for Board ratification, with reference information updated. The retained operative provisions, including the yearly-adjustable slow-start rule, remain substantively the same as draft 7; punctuation and explanatory wording differ. This is evidence of the stated purpose of the renewal, not proof that the Board ratified the proposal or that deployment occurred on 15 May 2022.

Availability of the staff assessment · The draft-7 page carries a full staff assessment, including operational effects and phased implementation. The retained draft-8 page ends with Staff Assessment (In Progress). That changes the evidence available on this page; it does not prove that the prior assessment was repudiated or that previously described systems obligations were removed. The earlier assessment remains retained separately.

Conflicting migrated metadata and status labels · The newer page title says Draft 8 and its history dates that version to 15 May 2022, yet its header reuses DRAFT01 and a 5 August 2020 submission date and labels the page Archived. The older draft-7 page says Ratified. These are conflicting retained page metadata and capture contexts, not evidence that ratification was reversed. The derived sequence uses the explicit draft-8 title and history while preserving both source snapshots and their status differences.

Debate timeline

  1. Official version

    1

    Source facts ↗
  2. Official version

    2

    Source facts ↗
  3. Official version

    1

    Under discussion · Under Discussion

    Source facts ↗
  4. Official version

    2

    Under discussion · Under Discussion

    Source facts ↗
  5. Official version

    3

    Unknown · Archived

    Source facts ↗
  6. Official version

    DRAFT03

    Unknown · Archived

    Source facts ↗
  7. Official version

    4

    Unknown · Archived

    Source facts ↗
  8. Official version

    DRAFT01

    Unknown · Archived

    Source facts ↗
  9. Official version

    DRAFT01

    Unknown · Archived

    Source facts ↗
  10. Official version

    5

    Unknown · Archived

    Source facts ↗
  11. Official version

    DRAFT01

    Unknown · Archived

    Source facts ↗
  12. Official version

    DRAFT01

    Unknown · Archived

    Source facts ↗
  13. Official version

    6

    Unknown · Archived

    Source facts ↗
  14. Official decision

    accepted

    accepted

    Source facts ↗
  15. Introduced

    Introduced

    Source facts ↗
  16. Official version

    7

    Accepted · Ratified

    Source facts ↗
  17. Official version

    8

    Unknown · Archived

    Source facts ↗

Entities

Freshness: Stale
  1. Discussion messages0
    First activityUnknown
    Last activityUnknown
    First explicit stanceUnknown
    Latest explicit stanceUnknown
    Stance changes0
    Viewpoint consistencyNo explicit position stated
    Other policies7

Sources and coverage

Official policy sources

Public discussion archives

  • afrinic-rpd
    Earliest captured
    Aug 4, 2004
    Latest captured
    Aug 25, 2026
    Last refresh
    Oct 10, 2026
    Coverage
    Source coverage is incomplete.
    Loading
    13,116
    Known gaps
    0
  • www.afrinic.net
  • afrinic-africann
    Earliest captured
    Aug 3, 2026
    Latest captured
    Oct 2, 2026
    Last refresh
    Oct 10, 2026
    Coverage
    Source coverage is incomplete.
    Loading
    2,524
    Known gaps
    0
  • afrinic-afripv6-discuss
    Earliest captured
    Aug 17, 2015
    Latest captured
    Sep 18, 2026
    Last refresh
    Oct 10, 2026
    Coverage
    Source coverage is incomplete.
    Loading
    2,538
    Known gaps
    0
  • afrinic-announce
    Earliest captured
    Aug 18, 2015
    Latest captured
    Sep 18, 2026
    Last refresh
    Oct 10, 2026
    Coverage
    Source coverage is incomplete.
    Loading
    2,497
    Known gaps
    0
  • afrinic-community-discuss
    Earliest captured
    Sep 11, 2015
    Latest captured
    Dec 29, 2019
    Last refresh
    Oct 10, 2026
    Coverage
    Source coverage is incomplete.
    Loading
    3,127
    Known gaps
    0
  • afrinic-dbwg
    Earliest captured
    Aug 4, 2026
    Latest captured
    Oct 6, 2026
    Last refresh
    Oct 10, 2026
    Coverage
    Source coverage is incomplete.
    Loading
    873
    Known gaps
    0
  • afrinic-dnssec-ops
    Earliest captured
    Aug 18, 2015
    Latest captured
    Dec 1, 2016
    Last refresh
    Oct 10, 2026
    Coverage
    Source coverage is incomplete.
    Loading
    307
    Known gaps
    0
  • afrinic-icp2-review
    Earliest captured
    Apr 10, 2025
    Latest captured
    Nov 10, 2025
    Last refresh
    Oct 10, 2026
    Coverage
    Source coverage is incomplete.
    Loading
    0
    Known gaps
    0
  • afrinic-measurement-wg
    Earliest captured
    Feb 1, 2018
    Latest captured
    Nov 22, 2024
    Last refresh
    Oct 10, 2026
    Coverage
    Source coverage is incomplete.
    Loading
    138
    Known gaps
    0
  • afrinic-mira
    Earliest captured
    Nov 17, 2020
    Latest captured
    Nov 22, 2024
    Last refresh
    Oct 10, 2026
    Coverage
    Source coverage is incomplete.
    Loading
    0
    Known gaps
    0
  • afrinic-ois-wg
    Earliest captured
    Sep 9, 2021
    Latest captured
    Nov 22, 2024
    Last refresh
    Oct 10, 2026
    Coverage
    Source coverage is incomplete.
    Loading
    0
    Known gaps
    0
  • afrinic-rpki-discuss
    Earliest captured
    Jan 15, 2016
    Latest captured
    Apr 23, 2026
    Last refresh
    Oct 10, 2026
    Coverage
    Source coverage is incomplete.
    Loading
    154
    Known gaps
    0

Coverage

Partial
Earliest captured: Aug 4, 2004
Latest captured: Oct 10, 2026

Freshness

Freshness: Stale · Last refresh:

Known gaps

  • www.afrinic.net: Source coverage is incomplete. · The source boundary has not yet been reached.
  • www.afrinic.net: Source coverage is incomplete. · The source boundary has not yet been reached.
  • afrinic-rpd: Source coverage is incomplete. · The source boundary has not yet been reached.
  • www.afrinic.net: Source coverage is incomplete. · The source boundary has not yet been reached.
  • afrinic-africann: Source coverage is incomplete. · The source boundary has not yet been reached.
  • afrinic-afripv6-discuss: Source coverage is incomplete. · The source boundary has not yet been reached.
  • afrinic-announce: Source coverage is incomplete. · The source boundary has not yet been reached.
  • afrinic-community-discuss: Source coverage is incomplete. · The source boundary has not yet been reached.
  • afrinic-dbwg: Source coverage is incomplete. · The source boundary has not yet been reached.
  • afrinic-dnssec-ops: Source coverage is incomplete. · The source boundary has not yet been reached.
  • afrinic-measurement-wg: Source coverage is incomplete. · The source boundary has not yet been reached.
  • afrinic-rpki-discuss: Source coverage is incomplete. · The source boundary has not yet been reached.