Out-Of-Region Use of AFRINIC Internet Number Resources

ceiling_calculation · The ceiling remains 40% of resources in use. The formula changes from x-y, with x defined as allocation/assignment size, to y explicitly defined as used space. The revision history attributes the arithmetic clarification to draft-02 and the allocation-only terminology to draft-03; this comparison does not treat Douglas's nearby suggestion of 30% as adopted draft text.

resource_scope · The operative scope narrows from allocations and assignments to allocations. The draft-03 history explicitly says assignments were removed. The summary still contains allocated/assigned wording, so the source retains an editorial inconsistency; this is a proposal comparison, not proof of adoption or current enforceability.

retrospective_application · The express reference to past allocations is removed while present and future allocations remain. The draft-03 changelog identifies retrospective application as the reason; it does not establish an exemption for every currently used older allocation.

stated_beneficiary · The problem statement shifts its reference from AFRINIC's best interests to those of the AFRINIC community. This changes the stated rationale, without changing the 40% ceiling, staff compliance discretion or the cited soft-landing termination condition.

Permission and threshold for out-of-region use · Draft 4 retains the 40% ceiling and the requirement that out-of-region use be preceded by in-region use, while expressing the permission as applying after ratification and defining the ceiling against the amount in use. The comparison reports the proposal wording without treating it as an enacted rule.

Measurement evidence and staff assessment · Draft 3 leaves assessment to AFRINIC staff's discretion using whatever means are available. Draft 4 adds Whois and global routing table evidence, allows other consistency criteria, and directs staff to use that defined basis for due diligence. This is a proposal comparison, not proof of implementation.

Temporal scope of allocations · Draft 3 says the policy applies to present and future allocations. Draft 4 says it applies to past, present and future allocations. The comparison records the broader proposed temporal wording and does not infer retroactive enforcement or adoption.