Proposal Observations - Wenzel | CodeGov
Note that CodeGov has already voted to adopt all 6 of the new subnet proposals. (137235, 137234, 137233, 137232, 137231, 137229) and each reviewer has posted their reviews. I have a few additional observations that I wanted to make as well based on the reviews that I have read and my understanding and knowledge of some of the discussion points.
Proposals 137231, 137234
These proposals are included in the initial proposed subnets that will support the Caffeine rollout that will occur within the next week. DFINITY is putting a lot of effort into Caffeine. The community is pumped about Caffeine. We need to be careful about unnecessarily stifling progress to implement the infrastructure that will support Caffeine.
It has been suggested by @Lorimer that proposal 137234 should be rejected because of a node provider cluster defined as BlueAnt (@1eo/@EnzoPlayer0ne) and Zarety (@dfisher). It has also been suggested by @Lorimer that proposal 137231 should be rejected because of a node provider cluster defined as DeNoDe (@DENODE-KR) and Allusion (@Paul_DC). These node providers have claimed independence according to the node provider onboarding policies and node transfer requirements that apply.
In fact, the only node provider cluster that has been implemented in the DRE tooling is the one confirmed by @GAbassad which consists of nodes owned by him, his wife, and his company. There are no other recognized clusters. However, there is a new NP independence policy that includes an independent auditor who will be capable of assessing the accuracy of claims of independence and will advise where there is a cluster that should be formally recognized. Any decisions based on clustering assumptions before then are premature. In fact, in the case of BlueAnt / Zarety, it has already been announced that changes have been implemented that are directly intended to satisfy the new NP independence policy requirements and the plan to do so was confirmed by @samuelburri at DFINITY.
@MalithHatananchchige I’d like to bring these observations to your attention since you have not voted yet on proposal 137231 and your vote will impact the Synapse vote on this proposal.
@alexu @maria @samuelburri Regardless of how co.delta and Synapse vote, I think it is safe to say that voting members of both CodeGov and Synapse would support your decision to adopt all of the proposed Caffeine subnets.
Proposal 137235
Several reviewers observed that proposal 137235 recommends a US Subnet with a non-conformance with respect to an IC Target Topology that is unachievable. The discrepancy in the target topology is that there are only 10 data center owners in the US and the subnet topology requires 13 data center owners. This is a limitation that cannot easily and quickly be resolved as it would require existing node providers to move nodes to a new data center location or the addition of new node providers and/or data center owners. This would be an expensive solution that would increase inflation. It seems unnecessary given the excess nodes we have already. Therefore, the more logical solution is to change the topology requirements to allow a subnet to have fewer than 13 data center owners. This task would add additional weeks if we expect this to be completed first and in the end we would adopt this same exact proposal. The NNS provided clear support to create this US Subnet in proposal 137147 where the vote was 74% YES to 0.3% NO. It seems to me that a more sensible approach is to adopt the proposal and then formally change the topology with another proposal following this proposal.
About CodeGov 
- reliable, credible, and sensible NNS governance
CodeGov has a team of developers who review and vote independently on the following proposal topics: IC-OS Version Election, Protocol Canister Management, Subnet Management, Node Admin, and Participant Management. The CodeGov NNS known neuron is configured to follow our reviewers on these technical topics. We also have a group of Followees who vote independently on the Governance and the SNS & Neuron's Fund topics. We strive to be a credible and reliable Followee option that votes on every proposal and every proposal topic in the NNS. We also support decentralization of SNS projects such as WaterNeuron, KongSwap, and Alice with a known neuron and credible Followees.
Learn more about CodeGov and its mission at codegov.org.