跳转到主要内容

AFRINIC · RIR 观察

AFPUB-2018-GEN-001-DRAFT07

从这里开始,逐项查看提案记录:发生了哪些变化、为何重要、各方提出了什么主张、立场如何演变、最终作出了什么决定,以及证据仍存在哪些缺口。

来源事实

政策编号
AFPUB-2018-GEN-001-DRAFT07
RIR
AFRINIC
官方状态
Ratified
标准化状态
已接受
提出时间
2021年5月17日
最近来源更新
2026年10月10日
覆盖范围
部分

究竟是谁影响了这场辩论?

1参与者总数
未知讨论参与者
1正式角色
未知讨论消息
未知有效参与者
未知前五名讨论占比
未知覆盖 50% 讨论的人数
未知覆盖 80% 讨论的人数

政策演变

1
讨论中 · Under Discussion
2018年8月12日
来源事实 ↗

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
讨论中 · Under Discussion
2018年11月20日
来源事实 ↗

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
未知 · Archived
2019年6月5日
来源事实 ↗

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
未知 · Archived
2019年11月22日
来源事实 ↗

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
未知 · Archived
2020年8月5日
来源事实 ↗

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
已接受 · Ratified
2021年5月17日
来源事实 ↗

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
未知 · Archived
2022年5月15日
来源事实 ↗

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.

讨论时间线

  1. 官方版本

    1

    来源事实 ↗
  2. 官方版本

    2

    来源事实 ↗
  3. 官方版本

    1

    讨论中 · Under Discussion

    来源事实 ↗
  4. 官方版本

    2

    讨论中 · Under Discussion

    来源事实 ↗
  5. 官方版本

    3

    未知 · Archived

    来源事实 ↗
  6. 官方版本

    DRAFT03

    未知 · Archived

    来源事实 ↗
  7. 官方版本

    4

    未知 · Archived

    来源事实 ↗
  8. 官方版本

    DRAFT01

    未知 · Archived

    来源事实 ↗
  9. 官方版本

    DRAFT01

    未知 · Archived

    来源事实 ↗
  10. 官方版本

    5

    未知 · Archived

    来源事实 ↗
  11. 官方版本

    DRAFT01

    未知 · Archived

    来源事实 ↗
  12. 官方版本

    DRAFT01

    未知 · Archived

    来源事实 ↗
  13. 官方版本

    6

    未知 · Archived

    来源事实 ↗
  14. 官方决定

    accepted

    accepted

    来源事实 ↗
  15. 正式提出

    正式提出

    来源事实 ↗
  16. 官方版本

    7

    已接受 · Ratified

    来源事实 ↗
  17. 官方版本

    8

    未知 · Archived

    来源事实 ↗

实体

新鲜度: 已过期
  1. 讨论消息0
    首次活动未知
    最近活动未知
    首次明确立场未知
    最近明确立场未知
    立场变化0
    观点一致性未明确表明立场
    其他政策7

来源与覆盖

公开讨论记录

  • afrinic-rpd
    最早收录
    2004年8月4日
    最近收录
    2026年8月25日
    最近刷新
    2026年10月10日
    覆盖范围
    来源覆盖尚不完整。
    加载中
    13,116
    已知缺口
    0
  • www.afrinic.net
  • afrinic-africann
    最早收录
    2026年8月3日
    最近收录
    2026年10月2日
    最近刷新
    2026年10月10日
    覆盖范围
    来源覆盖尚不完整。
    加载中
    2,529
    已知缺口
    0
  • afrinic-afripv6-discuss
    最早收录
    2015年8月17日
    最近收录
    2026年9月18日
    最近刷新
    2026年10月10日
    覆盖范围
    来源覆盖尚不完整。
    加载中
    2,538
    已知缺口
    0
  • afrinic-announce
    最早收录
    2015年8月18日
    最近收录
    2026年9月18日
    最近刷新
    2026年10月10日
    覆盖范围
    来源覆盖尚不完整。
    加载中
    2,497
    已知缺口
    0
  • afrinic-community-discuss
    最早收录
    2015年9月11日
    最近收录
    2019年12月29日
    最近刷新
    2026年10月10日
    覆盖范围
    来源覆盖尚不完整。
    加载中
    3,127
    已知缺口
    0
  • afrinic-dbwg
    最早收录
    2026年8月4日
    最近收录
    2026年10月6日
    最近刷新
    2026年10月10日
    覆盖范围
    来源覆盖尚不完整。
    加载中
    880
    已知缺口
    0
  • afrinic-dnssec-ops
    最早收录
    2015年8月18日
    最近收录
    2016年12月1日
    最近刷新
    2026年10月10日
    覆盖范围
    来源覆盖尚不完整。
    加载中
    307
    已知缺口
    0
  • afrinic-icp2-review
    最早收录
    2025年4月10日
    最近收录
    2025年11月10日
    最近刷新
    2026年10月10日
    覆盖范围
    来源覆盖尚不完整。
    加载中
    0
    已知缺口
    0
  • afrinic-measurement-wg
    最早收录
    2018年2月1日
    最近收录
    2024年11月22日
    最近刷新
    2026年10月10日
    覆盖范围
    来源覆盖尚不完整。
    加载中
    138
    已知缺口
    0
  • afrinic-mira
    最早收录
    2020年11月17日
    最近收录
    2024年11月22日
    最近刷新
    2026年10月10日
    覆盖范围
    来源覆盖尚不完整。
    加载中
    0
    已知缺口
    0
  • afrinic-ois-wg
    最早收录
    2021年9月9日
    最近收录
    2024年11月22日
    最近刷新
    2026年10月10日
    覆盖范围
    来源覆盖尚不完整。
    加载中
    0
    已知缺口
    0
  • afrinic-rpki-discuss
    最早收录
    2016年1月15日
    最近收录
    2026年4月23日
    最近刷新
    2026年10月10日
    覆盖范围
    来源覆盖尚不完整。
    加载中
    154
    已知缺口
    0

覆盖范围

部分
最早收录: 2004年8月4日
最近收录: 2026年10月10日

新鲜度

新鲜度: 已过期 · 最近刷新:

已知缺口

  • www.afrinic.net: 来源覆盖尚不完整。 · 尚未达到来源边界。
  • www.afrinic.net: 来源覆盖尚不完整。 · 尚未达到来源边界。
  • afrinic-rpd: 来源覆盖尚不完整。 · 尚未达到来源边界。
  • www.afrinic.net: 来源覆盖尚不完整。 · 尚未达到来源边界。
  • afrinic-africann: 来源覆盖尚不完整。 · 尚未达到来源边界。
  • afrinic-afripv6-discuss: 来源覆盖尚不完整。 · 尚未达到来源边界。
  • afrinic-announce: 来源覆盖尚不完整。 · 尚未达到来源边界。
  • afrinic-community-discuss: 来源覆盖尚不完整。 · 尚未达到来源边界。
  • afrinic-dbwg: 来源覆盖尚不完整。 · 尚未达到来源边界。
  • afrinic-dnssec-ops: 来源覆盖尚不完整。 · 尚未达到来源边界。
  • afrinic-measurement-wg: 来源覆盖尚不完整。 · 尚未达到来源边界。
  • afrinic-rpki-discuss: 来源覆盖尚不完整。 · 尚未达到来源边界。