Ce qui a changé
Aucun changement de politique ne peut être établi à partir des faits vérifiés fournis : la chronologie est vide et aucune version, étape procédurale, modification ou mise en œuvre n'est documentée.
RIPE NCC · Veille des RIR
Commencez ici pour consulter l’historique, proposition par proposition : ce qui a changé, pourquoi cela comptait, qui a défendu quoi, comment les positions ont évolué, ce qui a été décidé et quelles lacunes subsistent dans les preuves.
Faits sourcés
Qui a réellement façonné le débat ?
Analyse BTW
Aucun changement de politique ne peut être établi à partir des faits vérifiés fournis : la chronologie est vide et aucune version, étape procédurale, modification ou mise en œuvre n'est documentée.
La substance du débat ne peut pas être déterminée. Aucun message, participant, argument ou historique de position n'est enregistré dans la source analysée.
Ni une discussion substantielle ni une décision formelle ne sont établies. Les données comptent zéro message, zéro jour actif, zéro participant à la discussion et zéro acteur formel; elles ne permettent donc pas de conclure à une acceptation, un rejet, un retrait, un abandon ou un remplacement de la proposition.
Aucune concentration de participation n'est mesurable. Les parts top 1, top 5 et top 10, l'indice HHI, le nombre effectif de participants et les noyaux à 50 % et 80 % sont tous nuls parce qu'aucun message ni participant n'est observé. Ces valeurs ne démontrent ni une participation diffuse ni une domination concentrée.
Aucun point de blocage procédural, institutionnel ou participatif ne peut être identifié. L'absence d'activité observée pourrait correspondre à une absence réelle de débat ou à une lacune de couverture de la source, sans que les faits fournis permettent de trancher.
Public complaint transparency · Version 2.0 replaces the public list of individual reports with aggregate statistics: running totals for new and under-investigation reports and counts of closed reports by outcome. The earlier list would have exposed submission dates, resources and current state, plus content and reporter identity if the reporter consented. The revised section does not carry forward the individual website/FTP report-list requirement.
The existence of all such reports shall be made public. The submitter of the report will choose whether or not the contents of the report and the submitter's own identity is to bemade public. The published list of reports shall at least include: Date submitted; The resources the report is about; A reference to the report content, if the submitter indicated that it can be made public; The identity of the submitter, if the submitter indicated that it can be made public; The current state.Faits sourcés ↗
The RIPE NCC will handle all such reports and publish statistics about such reports publicly. The RIPE NCC will publish regularly statistics of the reports that have been received but not yet closed. These statistics will show the number of reports in each of the following categories: 'new': Submitted but not being investigated yet 'under-investigation': The RIPE NCC is investigating the reportFaits sourcés ↗
Private investigation progress · A new section gives both the reporter and the organisations mentioned in a report a way to follow the investigation, explicitly keeping this information non-public. This accompanies removal of the earlier public per-report state list.
The published list of reports shall at least include: Date submitted; The resources the report is about; A reference to the report content, if the submitter indicated that it can be made public; The identity of the submitter, if the submitter indicated that it can be made public; The current state.Faits sourcés ↗
2. Progress The RIPE NCC will provide a way to follow the progress of the investigation for both the person submitting a report and the organization(s) mentioned in the report. This information will not be published publicly.Faits sourcés ↗
Historical reports · Version 1.0 expressly excluded reports made before policy adoption from publication. The aggregate-statistics replacement omits that sentence. The revised text does not itself establish a historical reporting start date or expressly require retrospective publication, so neither is inferred from the omission.
Reports made prior to the adoption of this policy are not to be published.Faits sourcés ↗
The RIPE NCC will publish regularly statistics of the reports that have been received but not yet closed. These statistics will show the number of reports in each of the following categories: 'new': Submitted but not being investigated yet 'under-investigation': The RIPE NCC is investigating the reportFaits sourcés ↗
Stated tradeoff and attribution · The opposing rationale changes from the risk of false complaints damaging organisations' reputations to the concern that the proposal imposes procedures better decided by the RIPE NCC. The revised document also adds an attribution section naming Sander Steffann and Shane Kerr as active contributors. The returned-resource ledger remains in the proposal.
It is possible that someone maysubmit false complaints in order to damage the good name of other organisations. The proposers think that providing transparency will make such abuse of the reporting system less likely and if it should occur easier to identify.Faits sourcés ↗
b. Arguments opposing the proposal Such a policy as this forces a procedure on the RIPE NCC which is better left decided by the RIPE NCC. The proposers have tried to keep the policy as flexible as possible, while still providing transparency.Faits sourcés ↗
Chargement
Partielle
Première capture: 30 juin 1992
Dernière capture: 12 nov. 2026