Incident Handling with the New Boundary Node Architecture

[timk11]

Review from subnet thread:

@timk11

Voted to adopt proposal 134256.

This proposal authorises a Dfinity principal to deploy canisters on this subnet, with the intention of deploying a rate-limiting canister as part of the incident handling mechanism discussed here and then revoking this authorisation through a separate proposal.

My decision on this was a careful weigh-up given the arguments that have already been made. While a decentralised approach to deploying the new canister would be desirable, the tooling to enable this is not yet in place. This proposal asks us to trust the boundary node team to deploy the canister(s) as planned and then to follow this up by supporting a proposal to revoke their access. This is in keeping with the general approach approved by the community through proposal 134031, although noting that the proposal did not mention these specifics. To my mind, and specific to this case, the risks of trusting the team are less than the risks that the overall plan is intended to mitigate.

I also note that the boundary node team has requested the features needed to enable a decentralised canister deployment process and I would urge that this be prioritised. Questions: ● How big a job is this? ● Are there practical issues that might make this process difficult?