LACNIC · RIR ウォッチ
Acceptable Use Policy (AUP) for the Policy List
提案ごとの記録はここから確認できます。何が変わり、なぜ重要だったのか、誰が何を主張し、立場がどう変化し、何が決定され、どの点で証拠がなお不足しているのかを追えます。
出典に基づく事実
- ポリシー ID
- LAC-2018-13
- RIR
- LACNIC
- 公式ステータス
- Abandoned
- 正規化ステータス
- 中止
- 提出日
- 2021/04/28
- 出典の最終更新
- 2026/10/10
- 収録範囲
- 一部
実際に議論を方向づけたのは誰か?
ポリシーの変遷
Scope examples · The new text expressly states that the listed examples of out-of-scope discussion are illustrative only, clarifying that the prohibition is not limited to those examples.
出典に基づく事実 −
検証済みの根拠は利用できません。出典に基づく事実 +
検証済みの根拠は利用できません。Election-related list activity · The old text specifically addressed candidates for PDP chair and expressly mentioned voting dates and results; the new text refers more generally to candidates and the voting procedure, requires the remaining procedural steps to occur outside the list, and treats nominations and expressions for or against candidates as examples of prohibited activity.
出典に基づく事実 −
検証済みの根拠は利用できません。出典に基づく事実 +
検証済みの根拠は利用できません。Cultural and language considerations · The old text required cultural and language considerations when deciding on moderation of a participant; the new text applies those considerations when deciding on potential AUP violations.
出典に基づく事実 −
検証済みの根拠は利用できません。出典に基づく事実 +
検証済みの根拠は利用できません。Responses to improper messages · The old text treated responding to an improper third-party message as a violation; the new text limits this rule to inappropriate responses to inappropriate third-party messages.
出典に基づく事実 −
検証済みの根拠は利用できません。出典に基づく事実 +
検証済みの根拠は利用できません。Contact harvesting and honeypot checks · Both texts prohibit collecting participants' contact information and using it for spam, but the new text additionally authorizes LACNIC to periodically add external-domain email addresses as a honeypot to check for this conduct.
出典に基づく事実 −
検証済みの根拠は利用できません。出典に基づく事実 +
検証済みの根拠は利用できません。Subscriber and election reminders · The old text required an 'Election Silence' reminder before each community electoral process. The new text omits that requirement and instead requires any subscription reminders that are sent to remind subscribers of the AUP.
出典に基づく事実 −
検証済みの根拠は利用できません。出典に基づく事実 +
検証済みの根拠は利用できません。Temporary list moderation · The old text began with a general rule that the Public Policy List may not be moderated, subject to a very exceptional temporary-moderation provision. The new text retains the exceptional authority but omits that express general prohibition, describes the eight-hour limit as approximate, and adds that staff will support the chairs.
出典に基づく事実 −
検証済みの根拠は利用できません。出典に基づく事実 +
検証済みの根拠は利用できません。Election penalties for suspension evasion · The old text made disqualification as a candidate and loss of nomination rights mandatory for attempted fraud by a suspended participant, applying to any LACNIC electoral process for four years. The new text makes those consequences discretionary by stating that violations may result in loss of candidate and nomination rights in election processes for four years.
出典に基づく事実 −
検証済みの根拠は利用できません。出典に基づく事実 +
検証済みの根拠は利用できません。Authorization for non-policy discussions · The blanket exclusion of discussions outside the list's policy scope was changed to allow such discussions when the chairs have made a prior and explicit decision.
出典に基づく事実 −
Any discussion outside this scope, including but not limited to, event announcements, calls for papers, advertising of any kind (including electoral advertising), expressions of support for candidates and, in general, any topic that is not explicitly policy-related, is outside the scope of this list.出典に基づく事実 ↗
出典に基づく事実 +
Except in case of prior and explicit decision of the chairs, any discussion not in line with this purpose,出典に基づく事実 ↗
Private-message confidentiality · The violations list was expanded to prohibit sending or forwarding private messages unless the involved parties have given prior and explicit consent.
出典に基づく事実 +
Ad hominem attacks, foul language, disrespect, and the sending (or forwarding) of private messages (unless with the prior and explicit consent of the parties involved).出典に基づく事実 ↗
Reporting suspected violations · The requirement to report suspected violations directly to the chairs was strengthened to require reporting them exclusively to the chairs.
Definition of spam · The prohibition on collecting contact information to send spam now expressly defines spam as any message not previously and explicitly requested.
出典に基づく事実 −
ther violations of the AUP include using the list to collect participants’ contact information and using such information to send spam.出典に基づく事実 ↗
出典に基づく事実 +
Use of the list to collect participants’ contact information and using such information for sending spam (any message that has not been previously and explicitly requested).出典に基づく事実 ↗
Fraud and penalty evasion · The former violation was limited to attempted fraud by a suspended participant, exemplified by using an alternative address; the new text covers any attempt to commit fraud or bypass a penalty, including use of alternative mail addresses.
出典に基づく事実 −
) Attempted fraud by a suspended participant, e.g. the use of an alternative mail address, is also considered a violation of the AUP.出典に基づく事実 ↗
出典に基づく事実 +
i) Any attempt to commit fraud or bypass a penalty, such as the use of alternative mail addresses.出典に基づく事実 ↗
Chair authority to identify additional unacceptable uses · The new version expressly authorizes the chairs to determine that actions beyond the enumerated violations are unacceptable uses of the list.
出典に基づく事実 −
) Attempted fraud by a suspended participant, e.g. the use of an alternative mail address, is also considered a violation of the AUP. j) Considering the global nature of list participants, when deciding on potential violations of the AUP, the chairs will take into account relevant cultural aspects and language differences.出典に基づく事実 ↗
出典に基づく事実 +
Based on the above, the chairs may determine what other actions also constitute unacceptable uses of the list.出典に基づく事実 ↗
Censorship of archived posts · The archive rule changed from an unqualified statement that posts may not be censored to a statement specifically that they may not be censored by LACNIC.
出典に基づく事実 −
ailing list posts are archived, they are publicly available and may not be censored.出典に基づく事実 ↗
出典に基づく事実 +
All mailing list posts are archived, they are publicly available and may not be censored by LACNIC.出典に基づく事実 ↗
Application to communication mechanisms other than mailing lists · The new version extends the entire policy to forums, applications, and other mechanisms under the same or technically equivalent terms; the old text proceeded directly from the mailing-list moderation rule to enforcement without such an extension.
出典に基づく事実 −
検証済みの根拠は利用できません。出典に基づく事実 +
If additional mechanisms are used other than a mailing list (forums, applications, etc.), the entire content of this policy will also apply, under the same or technically equivalent terms.出典に基づく事実 ↗
Trigger for four-year election penalties · The four-year loss of candidacy and nomination rights was changed from being triggered by violations of old item i, concerning attempted fraud by a suspended participant, to violations relating to election processes.
出典に基づく事実 −
iolations of item i) above may result in the loss of the right to be a candidate, as well as the right to nominate candidates, in election processes for four (4) years.出典に基づく事実 ↗
出典に基づく事実 +
Violations relating to election processes may result in the loss of the right to participate as a candidate, as well as the right to nominate candidates, in election processes for four (4) years.出典に基づく事実 ↗
Four-year election penalty for repeat violations · The new version additionally permits the four-year election-related penalty for repeat violations after the offender has received a penalty of at least one year.
出典に基づく事実 −
iolations of item i) above may result in the loss of the right to be a candidate, as well as the right to nominate candidates, in election processes for four (4) years.出典に基づく事実 ↗
出典に基づく事実 +
This penalty may also apply in case of repeat violations once the offender has been penalized for at least one year.出典に基づく事実 ↗
Rationale: participant knowledge of rules and penalties · The rationale changes the statement that participants “must” have explicit knowledge of permitted conduct and penalties to say that they “should” have such knowledge.
出典に基づく事実 −
検証済みの根拠は利用できません。出典に基づく事実 +
検証済みの根拠は利用できません。Temporary moderation duration · The moderation rule replaces the approximate maximum message delay of eight hours with a requirement that moderation last only for brief, defined periods and that messages not be delayed longer than strictly necessary.
出典に基づく事実 −
検証済みの根拠は利用できません。出典に基づく事実 +
検証済みの根拠は利用できません。Application of the AUP to additional communication systems · The old text applies the entire policy whenever mechanisms other than a mailing list are used. The new text instead describes the list as the current official PDP communication means and extends the AUP to future systems that replicate the list by automatically exchanging all posts with it, under the same or technically equivalent conditions.
出典に基づく事実 −
検証済みの根拠は利用できません。出典に基づく事実 +
検証済みの根拠は利用できません。Chair discretion in classifying listed violations · The new text expressly makes classification of the enumerated conduct as AUP violations subject to the discretion of the chairs; the old enumeration contains no equivalent discretion qualifier.
出典に基づく事実 −
検証済みの根拠は利用できません。出典に基づく事実 +
検証済みの根拠は利用できません。Evidence condition for contact harvesting, spam, fraud, and penalty evasion · The new text places contact-information harvesting and spam, as well as fraud or attempts to bypass a penalty, under an explicit “when evidence exists” condition. The old text lists these acts as violations without that express condition.
出典に基づく事実 −
検証済みの根拠は利用できません。出典に基づく事実 +
検証済みの根拠は利用できません。Posting suspensions for first and second violations · The old text automatically imposes a one-month suspension for a first violation and requires extension to one year for a second violation. The new text makes both consequences discretionary: a first violation may result in a one-month suspension, and a second may extend it up to one year.
出典に基づく事実 −
検証済みの根拠は利用できません。出典に基づく事実 +
検証済みの根拠は利用できません。Election-related violations and penalties · The old text permits a four-year loss of candidate-participation and nomination rights for election-related violations and allows the same penalty for repeat violations after at least a one-year penalty. The new text characterizes election-related violations as extremely serious, sets the stated loss of rights at two years, and allows up to four years for repeated violations.
出典に基づく事実 −
検証済みの根拠は利用できません。出典に基づく事実 +
検証済みの根拠は利用できません。Implementation when mailing-list technology is not ready · The new Additional information adds a staged implementation approach: it states that technical limitations should not prevent effectiveness upon consensus, permits initially distributing the AUP without immediately restricting posting, and defers mandatory acceptance for continued posting until the system is ready. The corresponding old Additional information ends after describing distribution and acceptance and contains no such fallback.
出典に基づく事実 −
検証済みの根拠は利用できません。出典に基づく事実 +
検証済みの根拠は利用できません。Subscriber acceptance requirements · The subscriber-specific process of sending new subscribers a link and requiring two checked confirmations is replaced by a general obligation for LACNIC to implement a system ensuring that subscribers read the PDP, especially the AUP, and confirm acceptance; subscribers who decline are limited to receiving messages.
出典に基づく事実 −
chairs. A link to the PDP and the text of the AUP will be sent to each new list subscriber, who must explicitly check their acceptance. Until confirming this link by checking both options, the subscriber will only be able to receive messages from出典に基づく事実 ↗
出典に基づく事実 +
e chairs. LACNIC shall implement a system that guarantees that subscribers will read the PDP (and especially the AUP) and confirm its acceptance. Should they choose not to do so, they will only be able to receive messages from出典に基づく事実 ↗
Detection of accounts used to violate the AUP · The fixed requirement to periodically add external email addresses as honeypots is replaced by a broader requirement to incorporate detection systems insofar as possible, with external-address honeypots retained only as an example.
出典に基づく事実 −
erences. LACNIC will periodically add different email addresses outside its domains to be used as a出典に基づく事実 ↗
出典に基づく事実 +
ferences. LACNIC shall incorporate systems that allow detecting, in so far as possible, the accounts used to breach the AUP. By way of an example, emails that are not part of the LACNIC domains may periodically be added to the list to serve as a出典に基づく事実 ↗
Chair discretion in classifying violations · Conduct listed in section 8.2 changes from being considered violations to conduct that may be considered violations at the chairs' discretion.
出典に基づく事実 −
icy List At the discretion of the chairs, the following are considered violations of出典に基づく事実 ↗
出典に基づく事実 +
licy List At the discretion of the chairs, the following may be considered violations o出典に基づく事実 ↗
Chair discretion over posting suspensions · Express chair discretion is moved from longer suspensions for successive violations to the initial one-month suspension and its extension for a second violation; the successive-violation sentence no longer separately states that discretion.
出典に基づく事実 −
erences. The first violation of the AUP may result in a temporary suspension of the offender's right to post to the list for a period of one (1) month, which may be extended up to one (1) year in case of a second violation. At the discretion of the chairs, successive violations may result in longer sus出典に基づく事実 ↗
出典に基づく事実 +
ferences. At the discretion of the chairs, the first violation of the AUP may result in a temporary suspension of the offender's right to post to the list for a period of one (1) month, which may be extended up to one (1) year in case of a second violation. Successive violations may result in longer su出典に基づく事実 ↗
Scope of election-related participation penalties · The election processes in which candidacy and nomination rights may be lost are specified as PDP election processes rather than election processes generally.
出典に基づく事実 −
ensions. Violations relating to election processes are considered extremely serious and may result in the loss of the right to participate as a candidate, as well as of the right to nominate candidates, in election processes for two (2) years and for up to four (4) years in case of repeated vi出典に基づく事実 ↗
出典に基づく事実 +
pensions. Violations relating to election processes are considered extremely serious and may result in the loss of the right to participate as a candidate, as well as of the right to nominate candidates, in PDP election processes for two (2) years and for up to four (4) years in case of repeated v出典に基づく事実 ↗
Implementation for existing subscribers and approval condition · The implementation provision requiring consensus, Board ratification, and an emailed acceptance workflow is replaced by a requirement for a mechanism covering existing subscribers without distinguishing their participation from that of new subscribers.
出典に基づく事実 −
rmation If this proposal achieves consensus, once it is ratified by the Board, this text will be emailed to all Public Policy List subscribers along with a link to a page where they will have to explicitly check their acceptance of the AUP and confirm that they are familiar with the PDP. Until confirming this link by checking both options, the subscriber will only be able to receive messages from t出典に基づく事実 ↗
出典に基づく事実 +
formation To implement this proposal, LACNIC must establish a mechanism for existing subscribers to receive and accept the AUP and the PDP such that no distinction is made between their participation and that of new su出典に基づく事実 ↗
Policy text · Astra identified a substantive wording change in this retained policy section.
出典に基づく事実 −
This moderation affects the openness of the list and especially its dynamics, two essential features of the Policy Development Process, which specifies that the list must be “completely open.” Any form of moderation constitutes censorship, even if only temporary, and therefore breaches the principle of openness. Current text N/A New text Analyze diff (Note: The following text would be added at the end of the current PDP.) 8.出典に基づく事実 ↗
出典に基づく事実 +
The LACNIC Community Code of Conduct (https://www.lacnic.net/4038/1/lacnic/codigo-de-conducta-de-la-comunidad-de-lacnic) specifies the following: “In the case of the mailing lists, acceptable use policies may apply that establish standards in addition to those specified in this Code.出典に基づく事実 ↗
Policy text · Astra identified a substantive wording change in this retained policy section.
出典に基づく事実 −
Current text N/A New text Analyze diff (Note: The following text would be added at the end of the current PDP.) 8.出典に基づく事実 ↗
出典に基づく事実 +
Current text N/A New text Analyze diff (Note: The following text would be added to the current PDP, possibly at the end of the existing text, at the discretion of LACNIC.) 8.出典に基づく事実 ↗
Policy text · Astra identified a substantive wording change in this retained policy section.
出典に基づく事実 −
Except in case of prior and explicit decision of the chairs, any discussion not in line with this purpose, such as event announcements, calls for papers, advertising of any kind (including electoral propaganda), expressions of support for candidates and, in general, any topic that is not explicitly policy-related, is outside the scope of this list.出典に基づく事実 ↗
出典に基づく事実 +
検証済みの根拠は利用できません。Policy text · Astra identified a substantive wording change in this retained policy section.
出典に基づく事実 +
検証済みの根拠は利用できません。Policy text · Astra identified a substantive wording change in this retained policy section.
出典に基づく事実 −
Only the chairs and/or LACNIC staff may call for and/or announce candidates and the voting procedure.出典に基づく事実 ↗
出典に基づく事実 +
検証済みの根拠は利用できません。Policy text · Astra identified a substantive wording change in this retained policy section.
出典に基づく事実 +
検証済みの根拠は利用できません。Policy text · Astra identified a substantive wording change in this retained policy section.
出典に基づく事実 −
By way of example, candidate nominations, expressions for or against a candidate or other similar actions are not allowed on the list.出典に基づく事実 ↗
出典に基づく事実 +
検証済みの根拠は利用できません。Policy text · Astra identified a substantive wording change in this retained policy section.
出典に基づく事実 −
Only the chairs may issue a warning to those in violation of the AUP and take the corresponding actions, announcing their decision through the list.出典に基づく事実 ↗
出典に基づく事実 +
Only the chairs may issue a warning to those in violation of the AUP and take the appropriate actions, announcing their decision through the list Any suspected violation must be reported exclusively to the chairs.出典に基づく事実 ↗
Policy text · Astra identified a substantive wording change in this retained policy section.
出典に基づく事実 −
LACNIC shall implement a system that guarantees that subscribers will read the PDP (and especially the AUP) and confirm its acceptance.出典に基づく事実 ↗
出典に基づく事実 +
LACNIC shall implement a system that guarantees that subscribers will read the PDP and the AUP, confirming their acceptance.出典に基づく事実 ↗
Policy text · Astra identified a substantive wording change in this retained policy section.
出典に基づく事実 −
If subscription reminders are sent, such messages must also remind subscribers of the AUP.” Likewise, at the bottom of each message, a link will be included to allow list subscribers to manage their subscription preferences.出典に基づく事実 ↗
出典に基づく事実 +
If subscription reminders are sent, such messages must also remind subscribers of the AUP.出典に基づく事実 ↗
Policy text · Astra identified a substantive wording change in this retained policy section.
出典に基づく事実 −
By way of an example, emails that are not part of the LACNIC domains may periodically be added to the list to serve as a honeypot.出典に基づく事実 ↗
Policy text · Astra identified a substantive wording change in this retained policy section.
出典に基づく事実 −
Mailing list posts are archived, they are publicly available and may not be censored by LACNIC.出典に基づく事実 ↗
議論のタイムライン
公開議論
[LACNIC/Politicas] Nueva versión de la propuesta LAC-2018-13
3 ディスカッションのメッセージ · 1 エンティティ
出典に基づく事実 ↗
エンティティ
- ディスカッションのメッセージ1初回活動2019/04/18最終活動2019/04/18最初の明示的立場不明最新の明示的立場不明立場の変化0見解の一貫性明示的な立場は示されていません他のポリシー39
- ディスカッションのメッセージ1初回活動2019/07/05最終活動2019/07/05最初の明示的立場不明最新の明示的立場不明立場の変化0見解の一貫性一貫性を評価するには証拠が不十分です他のポリシー2更新状況: 古い · 最終更新: · 最新の更新に失敗しました。最後に成功した結果を表示しています。
直近の調査試行: 2026/10/09
本人確認済み: 2026/10/09
· 履歴情報 Authors Tomas Lynch - Version [1, 2]
politicas.lacnic.netLACNIC · 履歴情報 También ha sido moderador del Foro Público de Políticas de LACNIC entre 2019 y 2023.
blog.lacnic.netLACNOG · 不明 Miembro fundador de LACNOG, participa asiduamente de LACNIC y LACNOG desde 2010 habiendo sido miembro del comité de programa de ambos eventos.
blog.lacnic.netVultr · 不明 Actualmente es Senior Network Architect en Vultr, Cloud Service Provider, a cargo de la estrategia, diseño, y operación de la red global de la empresa.
blog.lacnic.net確認済みの公開プロフィール
- ディスカッションのメッセージ
- 1
- 初回活動
- 2019/07/05
- 最終活動
- 2019/07/05
- 最初の明示的立場
- 不明
- 最新の明示的立場
- 不明
- 立場の変化
- 0
- 見解の一貫性
- 一貫性を評価するには証拠が不十分です
- 他のポリシー
- 2
最初の明示的立場: 不明 → 最新の明示的立場: 不明 · 立場の変化: 0
見解の一貫性: 一貫性を評価するには証拠が不十分です
この2通の連名通知は、異なる提案の手続き上の進展を記録しています。Tomas Lynch 個人の実質的な立場や、その変更を示すものではありません。LAC-2018-13 の多言語通知にある日付の食い違いは資料内の不整合であり、個人の立場が一貫していないことの証拠ではありません。本評価の対象は、この確認済みの2通に限られます。
Acceptable Use Policy (AUP) for the Policy List
評価: 一貫性を評価するには証拠が不十分です · LAC-2018-13 の通知は、未解決のスタッフの指摘についてコミュニティに意見を求めています。Tomas Lynch 個人の賛否は示されていないため、実質的な立場の一貫性は判断できません。
条件: 通知は、政策策定プロセスでの役割に基づき Tomas Lynch と Ariel Weher が連名で出したものです。 · スペイン語版とポルトガル語版には2019年7月25日、英語版には2019年6月25日と記されています。この食い違いから、一意の期限や個人の立場の変化を確定することはできません。
We would like to receive community feedback and comments on the impact analysis of LAC-2018-13 ?Acceptable Use Policy (AUP) for the Policy List, version 3,? as some of the staff?s comments remain unresolved.
el 25 de Julio de 2019.
until 25 June 2019.
Tom?s Lynch Ariel Weher Chairs of the Public Development Process LACNIC
Resources Are Assigned in a Unique and Exclusive Capacity
評価: 一貫性を評価するには証拠が不十分です · LAC-2019-6 の通知は、初期討議の終了と今後の合意評価を告知しています。提案への賛否を示すものでも、すでに合意に達したと宣言するものでもありません。
条件: 通知は政策プロセスの共同議長の連名であり、それぞれの個人的な立場を区別していません。 · 今回評価した資料には、この政策についてはこの手続き上の通知だけが含まれています。
We inform you that today is the culmination of initial discussion period for the following proposals: - LAC-2019-6 v2: Resources Are Assigned in a Unique and Exclusive Capacity The next step will be the assessment of the consensus by the co-chairs within two weeks from today.
Tom?s Lynch Ariel Weher Chairs of the Public Development Process LACNIC
Acceptable Use Policy (AUP) for the Policy List · Resources Are Assigned in a Unique and Exclusive Capacity
評価: 一貫性を評価するには証拠が不十分です · LAC-2018-13 への意見募集と、LAC-2019-6 の後続手続きの告知は、異なる提案と段階に関するものです。これらの行為は、個人の政策上の立場が矛盾していることを示しません。
条件: 本評価は、2019年7月と11月の確認済みの2通に限られます。 · 実質的な立場の一貫性について結論を出すには、Tomas Lynch 本人の発言と確認でき、立場とその条件を明示した資料が必要です。
We would like to receive community feedback and comments on the impact analysis of LAC-2018-13 ?Acceptable Use Policy (AUP) for the Policy List, version 3,? as some of the staff?s comments remain unresolved.
Tom?s Lynch Ariel Weher Chairs of the Public Development Process LACNIC
We inform you that today is the culmination of initial discussion period for the following proposals: - LAC-2019-6 v2: Resources Are Assigned in a Unique and Exclusive Capacity The next step will be the assessment of the consensus by the co-chairs within two weeks from today.
Tom?s Lynch Ariel Weher Chairs of the Public Development Process LACNIC
- 2019/07/05 · 手続き・中立
[LACNIC/Politicas] Análisis de impacto de las propuestas en discusión - Julio 2019
We would like to receive community feedback and comments on the impact analysis of LAC-2018-13 ?Acceptable Use Policy (AUP) for the Policy List, version 3,? as some of the staff?s comments remain unresolved.
出典に基づく事実 ↗
ポリシー別の立場タイムライン:LAC-2018-13 · 不明 · 一貫性を評価するには証拠が不十分ですLAC-2019-6 · 不明 · 一貫性を評価するには証拠が不十分ですLAC-2023-3 · 不明 · 明示的な立場は示されていませんポリシーメッセージ総数: 2
- Jordi Palet Martinez · 本人確認未解決ディスカッションのメッセージ0初回活動不明最終活動不明最初の明示的立場不明最新の明示的立場不明立場の変化0見解の一貫性明示的な立場は示されていません他のポリシー0
- Edwin Salazar · 本人確認未解決ディスカッションのメッセージ0初回活動不明最終活動不明最初の明示的立場不明最新の明示的立場不明立場の変化0見解の一貫性明示的な立場は示されていません他のポリシー0
出典と収録範囲
公開討議のアーカイブ
- lacnic-politicas
- 最初の収録
- 1999/10/21
- 最新の収録
- 2026/10/08
- 最終更新
- 2026/08/13
- 収録範囲
- 情報源の網羅状況は未完了です。
- 読み込み中
- 5,388
- 既知の欠落
- 26
- www.lacnic.net
- lacnic-anuncios
- 最初の収録
- 2026/08/13
- 最新の収録
- 2026/10/07
- 最終更新
- 2026/10/11
- 収録範囲
- 情報源の網羅状況は未完了です。
- 読み込み中
- 2,118
- 既知の欠落
- 0
- lacnic-ietf-lac
- 最初の収録
- 2013/05/30
- 最新の収録
- 2015/12/30
- 最終更新
- 2026/10/11
- 収録範囲
- 情報源の網羅状況は未完了です。
- 読み込み中
- 1,133
- 既知の欠落
- 0
- lacnic-infofrida
- 最初の収録
- 2006/08/14
- 最新の収録
- 2011/09/13
- 最終更新
- 2026/10/11
- 収録範囲
- 情報源の網羅状況は未完了です。
- 読み込み中
- 292
- 既知の欠落
- 0
- lacnic-iot
- 最初の収録
- 2015/10/06
- 最新の収録
- 2017/07/11
- 最終更新
- 2026/10/11
- 収録範囲
- 情報源の網羅状況は未完了です。
- 読み込み中
- 373
- 既知の欠落
- 0
- lacnic-lacnog
- 最初の収録
- 2026/08/01
- 最新の収録
- 2026/10/09
- 最終更新
- 2026/10/11
- 収録範囲
- 情報源の網羅状況は未完了です。
- 読み込み中
- 6,123
- 既知の欠落
- 0
- lacnic-lactf
- 最初の収録
- 2004/04/13
- 最新の収録
- 2006/12/29
- 最終更新
- 2026/10/10
- 収録範囲
- 情報源の網羅状況は未完了です。
- 読み込み中
- 2,267
- 既知の欠落
- 0
- lacnic-seguridad
- 最初の収録
- 2006/01/26
- 最新の収録
- 2007/12/28
- 最終更新
- 2026/10/10
- 収録範囲
- 情報源の網羅状況は未完了です。
- 読み込み中
- 1,356
- 既知の欠落
- 0
収録範囲
一部
最初の収録: 1999/10/21
最新の収録: 2026/10/11
更新状況
既知の欠落
- politicas.lacnic.net: 情報源の網羅状況は未完了です。 · 情報源の境界にはまだ到達していません。
- www.lacnic.net: 情報源の網羅状況は未完了です。 · 情報源の境界にはまだ到達していません。
- lacnic-politicas: 情報源の網羅状況は未完了です。 · 情報源の境界にはまだ到達していません。
- www.lacnic.net: 情報源の網羅状況は未完了です。 · 情報源の境界にはまだ到達していません。
- lacnic-anuncios: 情報源の網羅状況は未完了です。 · 情報源の境界にはまだ到達していません。
- lacnic-ietf-lac: 情報源の網羅状況は未完了です。 · 情報源の境界にはまだ到達していません。
- lacnic-infofrida: 情報源の網羅状況は未完了です。 · 情報源の境界にはまだ到達していません。
- lacnic-iot: 情報源の網羅状況は未完了です。 · 情報源の境界にはまだ到達していません。
- lacnic-lacnog: 情報源の網羅状況は未完了です。 · 情報源の境界にはまだ到達していません。
- lacnic-lactf: 情報源の網羅状況は未完了です。 · 情報源の境界にはまだ到達していません。
- lacnic-seguridad: 情報源の網羅状況は未完了です。 · 情報源の境界にはまだ到達していません。
