创建常见问题解答部分

以下为“协作平台 v3.2 发布变更—兼容计费”FAQ 中的5个常见问题与回答。内容聚焦计费兼容性，便于快速核实与落地执行。

1) 问：v3.2 是否会改变现有订阅/套餐或触发自动迁移？
答：
- 小版本升级通常不自动变更已生效的订阅计划或合同条款；任何计费变更需以官方发布说明、控制台变更提示或合同补充协议为准。
- 建议核实：
  - 控制台订阅与计费计划页面的“变更记录/生效时间”；
  - v3.2 发布说明中的“计费与条款变更”章节；
  - 如为企业合约，向客户代表确认是否存在强制迁移窗口或选择加入机制。

2) 问：v3.2 是否调整了计量口径（计费项、单位、取整、计费时点），会影响当月账单吗？
答：
- 任何新增/重命名的计量项、生效边界（升级前后分段计量）、按比例（proration）规则、最小计费单元/取整策略，如有变更，均可能影响当期费用。
- 建议核实与验证：
  - 查看“计费设置/用量导出”中计量项名称（meter）、单位（unit）与取整规则的更新；
  - 下载升级前后同口径用量报表进行字段对比；
  - 确认变更的生效时点与适用账期（同月内是否分段计费）。

3) 问：计费相关 API 与对账报表在 v3.2 是否保持向后兼容？
答：
- 旧版端点通常保留向后兼容一段时间，可能被标记为“弃用”并设定移除时间表；报表字段可能新增或重命名。
- 建议措施：
  - 查阅 API 版本变更日志与弃用公告，关注 price_id、meter_name、unit、usage_timestamp 等关键字段；
  - 为解析器增加“旧字段回退+新字段优先”的兼容逻辑；
  - 在测试环境回归校验对账流程（含分页、排序、时区/时间戳精度、空值处理）。

4) 问：价格、折扣、最低消费等合约条款是否因 v3.2 变化而调整？
答：
- 价格与折扣以合同及官方价目表为准，版本升级本身不会自动修改既有条款；启用新功能或更高配额可能产生新增费用。
- 建议核实：
  - 合同与控制台价格表中的单价、折扣、最低消费/承诺量是否因启用新能力而变化；
  - 是否需要在启用新功能前进行预算评估与审批；
  - 配置用量与支出告警，避免因默认开通的可选能力导致意外费用。

5) 问：若从 v3.2 回滚到 v3.1（或在灰度期间跨版本使用），对计费是否有影响？
答：
- 回滚与灰度可能导致计量项版本不一致、报表字段差异或分段计费。应确保回滚窗口内的用量数据可被连续、唯一地对账。
- 建议操作：
  - 在回滚前冻结当期用量导出，记录分段生效时间；
  - 复核回滚后计量映射表，确认旧版是否完整接收并结算灰度期间数据；
  - 对接财务对账规则，标注“版本分段”维度，避免重复计费或漏计。

提示：
- 以上为计费兼容的通用核对点。请以贵组织的合同、平台控制台与官方发布说明为最终依据。
- 建议在测试租户先行验证：升级—运行典型用量—导出前后对账—确认无差异后再在生产环境启用。

Permissions Module Configuration — Common Questions and Troubleshooting (FAQ Draft)

1) Why does a user still receive “Access Denied” after being assigned a role?
- Symptoms:
  - User has a new role but continues to get 403/AccessDenied.
  - Effective permissions view shows incomplete privileges.
- Likely causes:
  - Permission propagation delay or stale authorization cache.
  - Role does not include the required action on the specific resource or scope (e.g., environment/project/tenant).
  - Conditions on the policy (attribute- or time-based) evaluate to false.
  - User is authenticating under a different tenant, org, or environment than intended.
- Resolution:
  - Confirm the role->permission mapping includes the exact actions and resource identifiers required.
  - Verify the scope on the assignment (e.g., role bound to the correct tenant/project/namespace).
  - Clear or invalidate permission caches; wait for replication if using async policy stores.
  - Review conditional rules (ABAC) and ensure the user/resource attributes satisfy them.
  - Re-authenticate the user to obtain a fresh token if claims are used for authorization.
- How to verify:
  - Use a “policy simulator” or “effective permissions” endpoint to evaluate the exact request tuple (subject, action, resource, context).
  - Inspect the user’s token/claims for expected roles/scopes/tenants.
  - Check audit logs for policy decision traces and reasons.

2) Why is access denied when the role appears to allow it? (Deny vs. Allow precedence)
- Symptoms:
  - Role grants an action, but access is still denied.
- Likely causes:
  - An explicit deny rule takes precedence over allow.
  - A group membership adds a deny policy unknown to the administrator.
  - Default “deny-by-default” baseline applies because the resource pattern did not match any allow rule.
- Resolution:
  - Review all policies affecting the subject, including inherited roles and group-level policies.
  - Identify and remove or scope down explicit deny rules where appropriate.
  - Ensure the allow rule matches the exact resource identifier/pattern and context.
- How to verify:
  - Generate an “effective policy” report for the user and resource to see the final merged decision and rule source.
  - Temporarily isolate the user to a minimal role set to confirm the conflicting policy.

3) Why do wildcard- or pattern-based permissions not match the intended resources?
- Symptoms:
  - Policies using wildcards or regex do not apply as expected.
  - Some resources match; others do not, despite similar names.
- Likely causes:
  - Incorrect pattern syntax (e.g., using regex where glob is required or vice versa).
  - Case sensitivity differences between policy engine and resource identifiers.
  - Missing namespace or hierarchical delimiter in the pattern (e.g., resource paths or URNs).
  - Overly broad pattern that is shadowed by a more specific deny rule.
- Resolution:
  - Confirm the supported pattern type (glob vs. regex) and syntax; escape delimiters if required.
  - Normalize case to match engine rules; avoid mixed-case identifiers where possible.
  - Include full resource namespaces (e.g., org/env/project/resource) in patterns.
  - Test patterns in a policy simulator with representative resource IDs.
- How to verify:
  - Run targeted evaluations for specific resource IDs to confirm matches.
  - Review logs for the matched rule and pattern string used at decision time.

4) Why can users view or act on resources from other tenants/projects/environments?
- Symptoms:
  - Cross-tenant or cross-environment visibility or actions.
- Likely causes:
  - Role assignment performed at an organization/global scope rather than tenant/project scope.
  - Missing tenant/environment condition in ABAC or row-level filters.
  - Resource objects created without the expected tenant tags or attributes.
  - Inherited roles at higher levels that cascade unintentionally.
- Resolution:
  - Restrict role bindings to the narrowest scope needed (least privilege).
  - Add mandatory tenant/environment conditions to policies and data filters.
  - Enforce tagging/labeling at resource creation via policy or admission controls.
  - Audit inherited/grandparent roles and remove or re-scope as needed.
- How to verify:
  - List effective role bindings for the user by scope.
  - Run queries/reports for cross-tenant grants and remediate anomalies.
  - Validate that resources have required tenant/environment attributes.

5) Why do API requests fail due to scope or claim mismatches (OAuth/JWT vs. internal permissions)?
- Symptoms:
  - API gateway returns 403 “insufficient_scope” or similar, while RBAC appears correctly configured.
- Likely causes:
  - External auth scopes (e.g., OAuth) are not mapped to internal permission names/actions.
  - Token does not include updated roles/scopes due to caching or missing re-authentication.
  - Multiple issuers or audiences configured; the service validates a different claim set than expected.
- Resolution:
  - Define and maintain a mapping between external scopes and internal permissions (e.g., scope:read:orders -> permission:orders.read).
  - Ensure the authorization middleware checks the correct claim fields and audiences.
  - Invalidate session and obtain a fresh token after role/scope changes.
  - Document required scopes per endpoint and align OpenAPI/contract with enforcement.
- How to verify:
  - Decode the JWT to confirm scopes/claims and audience; compare to the service’s required permissions.
  - Exercise endpoints with a policy simulator or test token containing only the expected scopes to validate mapping.

General prevention and best practices:
- Adopt least-privilege defaults and deny-by-default where feasible.
- Keep a single source of truth for roles, permissions, and scope mappings; automate drift detection.
- Use version-controlled policy definitions with peer review and CI validations (linting, simulation tests).
- Implement audit logging for policy evaluations and role-binding changes; review regularly.
- Document naming conventions, resource hierarchies, and pattern syntax; provide tested examples.

- ¿Cuál es el plazo estándar y cuáles son los estados del ciclo para procesar un reembolso desde su aprobación hasta la acreditación en el método de pago?
- ¿Qué datos y documentos son obligatorios para solicitar un reembolso y para emitir la documentación asociada (nota de crédito/factura rectificativa)?
- ¿Cómo se gestionan los reembolsos parciales y cómo deben reflejarse en la contabilidad y en la documentación fiscal (p. ej., notas de crédito parciales, referencias a la factura original)?
- ¿Cuál es el procedimiento correcto para corregir o anular una factura con datos erróneos cuando existe un reembolso total o parcial (cancelación, refacturación, numeración y referencias)?
- ¿Por qué el importe del reembolso puede diferir del esperado y de qué manera influyen comisiones, cambios de divisa, retenciones, promociones o cargos no reembolsables en el monto y en la documentación de soporte?