Proposal 134975 Review | LORIMER Known Neuron
VOTE: YES
TLDR: Decentralisation stats are unchanged and there is a clear public declaration for the cordoned node which is referred to in the proposal summary. 1 cordoned node replaced with another node belonging to the same NP at the same data centre.
Country Discrepancies (1)
Decentralisation Stats
Subnet node distance stats (distance between any 2 nodes in the subnet) →
| Smallest Distance | Average Distance | Largest Distance | |
|---|---|---|---|
| EXISTING | 543.415 km | 9054.718 km | 18504.433 km |
| PROPOSED | 543.415 km | 9054.718 km | 18504.433 km |
Subnet characteristic counts →
| Continents | Countries | Data Centers | Owners | Node Providers | Node Operator | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| EXISTING | 5 | 13 | 13 | 13 | 13 | 13 |
| PROPOSED | 5 | 13 | 13 | 13 | 13 | 13 |
Largest number of nodes with the same characteristic (e.g. continent, country, data center, etc.) →
| Continent | Country | Data Center | Owner | Node Provider | Node Operator | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| EXISTING | 5 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 |
| PROPOSED | 5 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 |
See here for acceptable limits → Motion 132136
The above subnet information is illustrated below, followed by a node reference table:
Map Description
-
Red marker represents a removed node (transparent center for overlap visibility)
-
Green marker represents an added node
-
Blue marker represents an unchanged node
-
Highlighted patches represent the country the above nodes sit within (red if the country is removed, green if added, otherwise grey)
-
Light grey markers with yellow borders are examples of unassigned nodes that would be viable candidates for joining the subnet according to formal decentralisation coefficients (so this proposal can be viewed in the context of alternative solutions that are not being used)
-
Black dotted line connects to a small black marker that shows where the IP address indicates the node is located (according to
api.ip2location.io). This is only displayed if it conflicts with where IC records indicate the node is located. See Country Discrepancies section above for more info.
Node Changes
| Action | Node | Status | Continent | Country | Data Center | Owner | Node Provider | Node Operator | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Remove |  |
||||||||
| Add | zxxo4 | UNASSIGNED | |
Europe | Slovenia | Maribor (mb1) | Posita.si | Fractal Labs AG | 3xiew |
Other Nodes
| Node | Status | Continent | Country | Data Center | Owner | Node Provider | Node Operator | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 6wnv3 | UP | |
Oceania | Australia | Queensland 1 (sc1) | NEXTDC | ANYPOINT PTY LTD | srrm2 |
| 2grd6 | UP | |
North America | Canada | Toronto 2 (to2) | Cyxtera | Blockchain Development Labs | 4lp6i |
| vudfj | UP | |
Europe | Switzerland | Zurich 6 (zh6) | Green.ch | Sygnum Bank | ciprs |
| aqbno | UP | |
North America | Costa Rica | San José 1 (cr1) | Navegalo | GeoNodes LLC | eqv2i |
| jux3z | UP | |
Asia | Hong Kong | HongKong 4 (hk4) | hkntt | Web3game | dg7of |
| fh6lp | UP | |
Asia | India | Panvel 2 (pl2) | Yotta | Krishna Enterprises | 7rw6b |
| asad5 | UP | |
Asia | Japan | Tokyo (ty1) | Equinix | Starbase | cqjev |
| wgigf | UP | |
Asia | Korea (the Republic of) | Seoul 3 (kr1) | KT | Pindar Technology Limited | iubpe |
| ptzzn | UP | |
Europe | Sweden | Stockholm 1 (sh1) | Digital Realty | DFINITY Stiftung | lgp6d |
| ux7wu | UP | |
Asia | Singapore | Singapore 2 (sg2) | Telin | OneSixtyTwo Digital Capital | qffmn |
| buqsd | UP | |
North America | United States of America (the) | Sterling (st1) | CyrusOne | MI Servers | tcn4t |
| jys4w | UP | |
Africa | South Africa | Gauteng 3 (jb3) | Xneelo | Wolkboer (Pty) Ltd | ymenq |
*This comment references the latest comment in the Subnet Management - General Discussion thread only to generate an automated cross-link from the general thread (to improve topic navigation).
You may wish to follow D-QUORUM if you found this analysis helpful.
Known Neurons to follow if you're too busy to keep on top of things like this
If you found this analysis helpful and would like to follow the vote of the LORIMER known neuron in the future, consider configuring LORIMER as a followee for the Subnet Management topic.
Additional good neurons to follow:
- D-QUORUM (a highly decentralized neuron that follows neurons that have been elected by the NNS)
- Synapse (currently follows the LORIMER and CodeGov known neurons for Subnet Management, and is a generally well informed known neuron to follow on numerous other topics)
- WaterNeuron (the WaterNeuron DAO frequently discuss proposals like this in order to vote responsibly based on DAO consensus)
Note that this analysis involved data provided by the IC-API, which is not open source. I’m in the process of switching over to more verifiable sources of this sort of information for future proposal reviews. See here for related discussion.