New Node Provider Proposals

Roadmap
,
492

Hi all :wave:t3:

I’m Quint from Aviate Labs, and I’ve been reviewing proposals 133082 and 133083. After going through the details, I’ll be voting to adopt both, but there’s an important consideration regarding the order in which these proposals should be executed.

After validating the node data on-chain using scripts from our repo, I’ve confirmed the current setup for node provider 4jjya:

  • They have 10 nodes, with 5 located in data center RG1 (operator ID jptla) and 5 in data center BT1 (operator ID mbnsu).
  • The current rewardable_nodes is set to:
    • 10 for BT1 (mbnsu),
    • None for RG1 (jptla).

Proposal 133083 aims to reduce the rewardable_nodes in BT1 from 10 to 5, while Proposal 133082 would set rewardable_nodes in RG1 to 5.

However, if Proposal 133082 is executed first, it would temporarily result in a total of 15 rewardable nodes for the provider (5 at RG1 and 10 at BT1), which exceeds the intended cap of 10. To prevent this, Proposal 133083 should be executed before Proposal 133082, lowering the rewardable nodes for BT1 to 5 before increasing RG1 to 5. This will ensure the total remains at 10 rewardable nodes, split evenly between the two data centers.

Thanks to everyone who’s contributed to this, and I’m in full support of the proposals with the above sequence in mind.

6 Likes