Subnet Management - 3hhby (Application)

[timk11]

Proposal 136378 | Tim - CodeGov

Vote: Reject

This proposal replaces node po5od which appears in the dashboard as “Status: Offline”. However, the replacement node 6euda is also offline, as are the vast majority of nodes in the same data centre.

As I recall (and as pointed out by others), the rewards proposal for this set of nodes was rejected by Dfinity for reasons that are not yet clear, so even if this node was fully functioning and added to the subnet it would be performing non-rewardable work.

@alexu @sat @1eo

About CodeGov

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 & Neurons’ 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 decentralisation 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.

[alexu]

The DFINITY Foundation will vote to REJECT 136378 due to accidentally using a not fully onboarded node provider’s hardware in the replacement.

[LaCosta]

Proposal 136378 – LaCosta | CodeGov

Vote: REJECT

The proposal aims to replace a dead node on subnet 3hhby:
dead node po5od Dashboard Status: Offline with node 6euda Dashboard Status: Awaiting.

Although the Dashboard still currently shows the replacement node as healthy, the Node’s DC im2 is unstable with several nodes degraded or offline. Also this node currently is not configured as rewardable.

About CodeGov

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.

[Lorimer]

Proposal 136434 Review | Lorimer - CO.DELTA △

VOTE: YES

TLDR: LGTM, offline node replaced with an unassigned node. Average distance between nodes is ever so slightly reduced, but formal decentralisation metrics are unaffected (in terms of subnet characteristic limits).

Decentralisation Stats

Subnet node distance stats (distance between any 2 nodes in the subnet) →

	Smallest Distance	Average Distance	Largest Distance
EXISTING	259.235 km	7465.599 km	16347.356 km
PROPOSED	259.235 km	7133.083 km (-4.5%)	16347.356 km

This proposal slightly reduces decentralisation, considered purely in terms of geographic distance (and therefore there’s a slight theoretical reduction in localised disaster resilience).

Subnet characteristic counts →

	Continents	Countries	Data Centers	Owners	Node Providers	Node Operator
EXISTING	4	13	13	13	13	13
PROPOSED	4	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	6	1	1	1	1	1
PROPOSED	6	1	1	1	1	1

See here for acceptable limits → Motion 135700

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)

Node Changes

Action	Node	Status		Continent	Country	Data Center	Owner	Node Provider	Node Operator
Remove	po5od	DOWN		Asia	Hong Kong	HongKong 1 (hk1)	Unicom	Pindar Technology Limited	vzsx4
Add	dofld	UNASSIGNED		Asia	Georgia	Tbilisi 1 (tb1)	Cloud9	George Bassadone	yhfy4

Other Nodes

Node	Status		Continent	Country	Data Center	Owner	Node Provider	Node Operator
zjcl6	UP		Oceania	Australia	Melbourne 2 (mn2)	NEXTDC	Icaria Systems Pty Ltd	l5lhp
hm6f7	UP		North America	Canada	Toronto 2 (to2)	Cyxtera	Blockchain Development Labs	4lp6i
hgbum	UP		Europe	Switzerland	Zurich 2 (zh2)	Everyware	DFINITY Stiftung	pi3wm
a6t2w	UP		Europe	Germany	Frankfurt 2 (fr2)	Equinix	Virtual Hive Ltd	3nu7r
vte5d	UP		Asia	India	Greater Noida 1 (gn1)	Yotta	ACCUSET SOLUTIONS	slaxf
qn5jg	UP		Asia	Korea (the Republic of)	Seoul 1 (sl1)	Megazone Cloud	Neptune Partners	ukji3
lsew2	UP		Europe	Lithuania	Vilnius 1 (bt1)	Baltneta	Artem Horodyskyi	cn25n
lmfy6	UP		Europe	Latvia	Riga 1 (rg1)	DEAC	Maksym Ishchenko	lh42a
7h3aw	UP		Europe	Romania	Bucharest (bu1)	M247	Iancu Aurel	c5ssg
3ppfv	UP		Asia	Singapore	Singapore (sg1)	Telin	OneSixtyTwo Digital Capital	d4bin
ocony	UP		Europe	Slovenia	Ljubljana 2 (lj2)	Anonstake	Anonstake	eu5wc
5u6dm	UP		North America	United States of America (the)	San Jose (sj2)	Digital Realty	BlockTech Ventures, LLC	eikix

---

You may wish to follow the CO.DELTA known neuron if you found this analysis helpful.

CO.DELTA △

We’re a verifiably decentralised collective who review IC deltas (changes applied by NNS proposals). We follow a common code:

• Look: We observe the details and context of NNS proposals
• Test: We test and verify the claims made by those proposals
• Automate: We automate as much as possible by building increasingly sophisticated tools that streamline and strengthen the reviewal process.

Every vote cast by CO.DELTA is the result of consensus among diligent, skilled and experienced team members acting independently. The CO.DELTA neuron follows the vote of D-QUORUM on NNS topics that the CO.DELTA team does not handle directly. You can therefore follow CO.DELTA on all topics and rely on the highest quality of vote.

---

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.

[aligatorr89]

Proposal 136434 Review | aligatorr - CO.DELTA △

VOTE: YES

TLDR: Replaces unhealthy node, it has been down last 5+ days.

• Proposed topology Nakamoto Coefficient stayed the same as on current topology.

Node Changes 1 removed, 1 added

Node ID	Status	Country	City	Node Provider	Data Center	Data Center Owner
po5od-oz2a3-3mjm5-sv4ss-exwfn-mlbr2-5vf6v-2f52u-uoqh7-yicbb-mae → dofld-ghkjo-hynoo-myl2n-mgqql-vsbou-5sowc-bcwtw-u4sr7-4w4dy-nqe	DOWN → UNASSIGNED	HK → GE	HongKong → Tbilisi	Pindar Technology Limited → George Bassadone	hk1 → tb1	Unicom → Cloud9

Current Nakamoto Coefficients and Topology, avg = 5.00

Attribute	Nakamoto Coefficient	Identical attribute values	Max allowed identical values	Unique Counts
Country	5		3	13
City	5		1	13
Data Center	5		1	13
Data Center Owner	5		1	13
Node Provider ID	5		1	13

Proposed Nakamoto Coefficients and Topology, avg = 5.00

Attribute	Nakamoto Coefficient	Identical attribute values	Max allowed identical values	Unique Counts
Country	5		3	13
City	5		1	13
Data Center	5		1	13
Data Center Owner	5		1	13
Node Provider ID	5		1	13

You may wish to follow the CO.DELTA known neuron if you found this analysis helpful.

CO.DELTA

We’re a verifiably decentralised collective who review IC deltas (changes applied by NNS proposals). We follow a common code:

• Look: We observe the details and context of NNS proposals.
• Test: We test and verify the claims made by those proposals.
• Automate: We automate as much as possible by building increasingly sophisticated tools that streamline and strengthen the reviewal process.

Every vote cast by CO.DELTA is the result of consensus among diligent, skilled and experienced team members acting independently. The CO.DELTA neuron follows the vote of D-QUORUM on NNS topics that the CO.DELTA team does not handle directly. You can therefore follow CO.DELTA on all topics and rely on the highest quality of vote.

[MalithHatananchchige]

Proposal 136434 Review | Malith H - CO.DELTA △

VOTE: YES

TLDR:
The proposal replaces offline node in Hongkong (Asia).
No issues were found in the nodes or locations proposed and decentralization stats remain the same. I vote to adopt

Provider Changes

Removed	Added
Pindar Technology Limited	George Bassadone

Location Changes

Removed	Added
Asia, HongKong 1	Asia, Tbilisi 1

Nodes Removed 1

Node ID	Status	Provider	Data Center	Location
po5od…	DOWN	Pindar Technology Limited	hk1	HongKong 1

Nodes Added 1

Node ID	Status	Provider	Data Center	Location
dofld…	UNASSIGNED	George Bassadone	tb1	Tbilisi 1

Passes:

Node po5od…: Health check passed.
Node po5od…: Remove from Subnet check passed.
Node dofld…: Replacement Status check passed.

You may wish to follow the CO.DELTA known neuron if you found this analysis helpful.

CO.DELTA

We’re a verifiably decentralised collective who review IC deltas (changes applied by NNS proposals). We follow a common code:

• Look: We observe the details and context of NNS proposals
• Test: We test and verify the claims made by those proposals
• Automate: We automate as much as possible by building increasingly sophisticated tools that streamline and strengthen the reviewal process.

Every vote cast by CO.DELTA is the result of consensus among diligent, skilled and experienced team members acting independently. The CO.DELTA neuron follows the vote of D-QUORUM on NNS topics that the CO.DELTA team does not handle directly. You can therefore follow CO.DELTA on all topics and rely on the highest quality of vote.

[timk11]

Proposal 136434 | Tim - CodeGov

Vote: Adopt

This proposal replaces node po5od which appears in the dashboard as “Status: Offline”. As shown in the proposal, decentralisation parameters are unchanged and remain within the requirements of the target topology.

About CodeGov

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 & Neurons’ 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 decentralisation 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.

[LaCosta]

Proposal 136434 – LaCosta | CodeGov

Vote: ADOPT

The proposal aims to replace a dead node on subnet 3hhby:
dead node po5od Dashboard Status: Offline with healthy node dofld.

There is no impact in the overall decentralization across all features.

About CodeGov

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.

[ZanderG]

I know this proposal already executed, so this doesn’t really matter but you stated that you planned to REJECT proposal 136434, but your reasoning suggests that you did not find anything wrong with the proposal? Is it maybe a typo or am I missing something?

[LaCosta]

Thanks for noticing. It was a typo indeed and it has been rectified.

[ZackDS]

Proposal #136434 — Zack | CodeGov

Vote: Adopted

Reason:
The proposal replaces dead Offline status node po5od from Hong Kong with unassigned healthy Awaiting status node dofld from Tbilisi, Georgia without any change to decentralization.

About CodeGov

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.

[DRE-Team]

A new proposal with ID 136734 has been submitted, please take a look.

Click here to open proposal details

Replace a node in subnet 3hhby

Motivation:

• replacing dead node vte5d

Calculated potential impact on subnet decentralization if replacing:

• 1 additional node would result in: equal decentralization across all features

Based on the calculated potential impact, not replacing additional nodes to improve optimization.

Note: the information below is provided for your convenience. Please independently verify the decentralization changes rather than relying solely on this summary.
Here is an explaination of how decentralization is currently calculated,
and there are also instructions for performing what-if analysis if you are wondering if another node would have improved decentralization more.

Decentralization Nakamoto coefficient changes for subnet 3hhby-wmtmw-umt4t-7ieyg-bbiig-xiylg-sblrt-voxgt-bqckd-a75bf-rqe:

    node_provider: 5.00 -> 5.00    (+0%)
      data_center: 5.00 -> 5.00    (+0%)
data_center_owner: 5.00 -> 5.00    (+0%)
             area: 5.00 -> 5.00    (+0%)
          country: 5.00 -> 5.00    (+0%)

Mean Nakamoto comparison: 5.00 → 5.00 (+0%)

Overall replacement impact: equal decentralization across all features

Details

Nodes removed:

• vte5d-zw5lg-axpbi-yrc6s-nm3mj-knu44-piwp3-ukrtj-xb4s5-mleiq-lae [health: dead]

Nodes added:

• qvguz-cfp5f-otty5-v74o4-6ys5b-t2h5p-r6b5y-7wnaq-yi4x3-yazqd-hae [health: healthy]

    node_provider                                                              data_center            data_center_owner            area                     country        
    -------------                                                              -----------            -----------------            ----                     -------        
    4dibr-2alzr-h6kva-bvwn2-yqgsl-o577t-od46o-v275p-a2zov-tcw4f-eae       1    bt1               1    Anonstake               1    Bucuresti           1    AU            1
    4r6qy-tljxg-slziw-zoteo-pboxh-vlctz-hkv2d-7zior-u3pxm-mmuxb-cae       1    bu1               1    Baltneta                1    California          1    CA            1
    6nbcy-kprg6-ax3db-kh3cz-7jllk-oceyh-jznhs-riguq-fvk6z-6tsds-rqe       1    fr2               1    Cloud9                  1    Douglas        0 -> 1    CH            1
    7at4h-nhtvt-a4s55-jigss-wr2ha-ysxkn-e6w7x-7ggnm-qd3d5-ry66r-cae       1    gn1          1 -> 0    Cyxtera                 1    Greater Noida  1 -> 0    DE            1
    bvcsg-3od6r-jnydw-eysln-aql7w-td5zn-ay5m6-sibd2-jzojt-anwag-mqe       1    im1          0 -> 1    DEAC                    1    Hesse               1    GE            1
    cp5ib-twnmx-h4dvd-isef2-tu44u-kb2ka-fise5-m4hta-hnxoq-k45mm-hqe  1 -> 0    lj2               1    Digital Realty          1    Ljubljana           1    IM       0 -> 1
    diyay-s4rfq-xnx23-zczwi-nptra-5254n-e4zn6-p7tqe-vqhzr-sd4gd-bqe       1    mn2               1    Equinix                 1    Melbourne           1    IN       1 -> 0
    i7dto-bgkj2-xo5dx-cyrb7-zkk5y-q46eh-gz6iq-qkgyc-w4qte-scgtb-6ae       1    rg1               1    Everyware               1    Ontario             1    KR            1
    ihbuj-erwnc-tkjux-tqtnv-zkoar-uniy2-sk2go-xfpkc-znbb4-seukm-wqe       1    sg1               1    M247                    1    Riga                1    LT            1
    kos24-5xact-6aror-uofg2-tnvt6-dq3bk-c2c5z-jtptt-jbqvc-lmegy-qae       1    sj2               1    Manx Telecom       0 -> 1    Seoul               1    LV            1
    ks7ow-zvs7i-ratdk-azq34-zio2b-gbekj-qjicg-pfhp3-ovhgu-k5qql-dae       1    sl1               1    Megazone Cloud          1    Singapore           1    RO            1
    rpfvr-s3kuw-xdqrr-pvuuj-hc7hl-olytw-yxlie-fmr74-sr572-6gdqx-iqe  0 -> 1    tb1               1    NEXTDC                  1    Tbilisi             1    SG            1
    vegae-c4chr-aetfj-7gzuh-c23sx-u2paz-vmvbn-bcage-pu7lu-mptnn-eqe       1    to2               1    Telin                   1    Vilnius             1    SI            1
    wdnqm-clqti-im5yf-iapio-avjom-kyppl-xuiza-oaz6z-smmts-52wyg-5ae       1    zh2               1    Yotta              1 -> 0    Zurich              1    US            1

[aligatorr89]

Proposal 136734 Review | aligatorr - CO.DELTA △

VOTE: YES

TLDR: Adopt due to an incentive to kickstart dc IsleOfMan1 - node is offline currently.

• qvguz is not UNASSIGNED!!!
• Data center im1 has 40 unhealthy nodes!!!
• Provider Blue Ant LLC has 40 unhealthy nodes!!!
• Proposed topology Nakamoto Coefficient stayed the same as on current topology.

Node Changes 1 removed, 1 added

Node ID	Status	Country	City	Node Provider	Data Center	Data Center Owner
vte5d-zw5lg-axpbi-yrc6s-nm3mj-knu44-piwp3-ukrtj-xb4s5-mleiq-lae → qvguz-cfp5f-otty5-v74o4-6ys5b-t2h5p-r6b5y-7wnaq-yi4x3-yazqd-hae	UP → DOWN	IN → IM	Greater Noida → Douglas	ACCUSET SOLUTIONS → Blue Ant LLC	gn1 → im1	Yotta → Manx Telecom

Current Nakamoto Coefficients and Topology, avg = 5.00

Attribute	Nakamoto Coefficient	Identical attribute values	Max allowed identical values	Unique Counts
Country	5		3	13
City	5		NA	13
Data Center	5		1	13
Data Center Owner	5		1	13
Node Provider ID	5		1	13

Proposed Nakamoto Coefficients and Topology, avg = 5.00

Attribute	Nakamoto Coefficient	Identical attribute values	Max allowed identical values	Unique Counts
Country	5		3	13
City	5		NA	13
Data Center	5		1	13
Data Center Owner	5		1	13
Node Provider ID	5		1	13

You may wish to follow the CO.DELTA known neuron if you found this analysis helpful.

CO.DELTA

We’re a verifiably decentralised collective who review IC deltas (changes applied by NNS proposals). We follow a common code:

• Look: We observe the details and context of NNS proposals.
• Test: We test and verify the claims made by those proposals.
• Automate: We automate as much as possible by building increasingly sophisticated tools that streamline and strengthen the reviewal process.

Every vote cast by CO.DELTA is the result of consensus among diligent, skilled and experienced team members acting independently. The CO.DELTA neuron follows the vote of D-QUORUM on NNS topics that the CO.DELTA team does not handle directly. You can therefore follow CO.DELTA on all topics and rely on the highest quality of vote.

[Lorimer]

Proposal 136734 Review | Lorimer - CO.DELTA △

VOTE: Pending NO (but will re-evaluate tomorrow) NO

TLDR: Proposes to replace an UP (online) node with a DOWN (offline) node. The online node has been offline recently (such as when this proposal was submitted), but currently appears to be fine. Here’s an illustration of its recent failed block on the Node Provider Rewards dashboard.

Note that metrics are not shown for the last day or two, and are not available for nodes that are not assigned to subnets (the proposed replacement node).

At this current point in time, adopting this proposal will mean putting this subnet into a worse configuration than it’s already in. If that’s still the case when I check again tomorrow, I’ll reject.

Very similar to Proposal 136736 Review | Lorimer - CO.DELTA △

Country Discrepancies (1)

BDL, is again exceptional in this respect…

Node	Data Center	Claimed Country	According to ipinfo.io
hm6f7	Toronto 2	Canada	United States of America (the)

Decentralisation Stats

Subnet node distance stats (distance between any 2 nodes in the subnet) →

	Smallest Distance	Average Distance	Largest Distance
EXISTING	259.235 km	7133.083 km	16347.356 km
PROPOSED	259.235 km	6938.83 km (-2.7%)	17074.658 km (+4.4%)

This proposal slightly reduces decentralisation, considered purely in terms of geographic distance (and therefore there’s a slight theoretical reduction in localised disaster resilience).

Subnet characteristic counts →

	Continents	Countries	Data Centers	Owners	Node Providers	Node Operator
EXISTING	4	13	13	13	13	13
PROPOSED	4	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	6	1	1	1	1	1
PROPOSED	7 (+16.666666666666664%)	1	1	1	1	1

See here for acceptable limits → Motion 135700

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 ipinfo.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.

As a side note, this proposal leads to slightly worse decentralisation in terms of clustering within Europe , which can be seen visually on the map above. Continent isn’t a formal part of the IC Target Topology, but I’m sure it will be one day.

Node Changes

Action	Node	Status		Continent	Country	Data Center	Owner	Node Provider	Node Operator
Remove	vte5d	UP		Asia	India	Greater Noida 1 (gn1)	Yotta	ACCUSET SOLUTIONS	slaxf
Add	qvguz	DOWN		Europe	Isle of Man	Douglas 1 (im1)	Manx Telecom	Blue Ant LLC	4isre

Other Nodes

Node	Status		Continent	Country	Data Center	Owner	Node Provider	Node Operator
zjcl6	UP		Oceania	Australia	Melbourne 2 (mn2)	NEXTDC	Icaria Systems Pty Ltd	l5lhp
hm6f7	UP		North America	Canada	Toronto 2 (to2)	Cyxtera	Blockchain Development Labs	4lp6i
hgbum	UP		Europe	Switzerland	Zurich 2 (zh2)	Everyware	DFINITY Stiftung	pi3wm
a6t2w	UP		Europe	Germany	Frankfurt 2 (fr2)	Equinix	Virtual Hive Ltd	3nu7r
dofld	UP		Asia	Georgia	Tbilisi 1 (tb1)	Cloud9	George Bassadone	yhfy4
qn5jg	UP		Asia	Korea (the Republic of)	Seoul 1 (sl1)	Megazone Cloud	Neptune Partners	ukji3
lsew2	UP		Europe	Lithuania	Vilnius 1 (bt1)	Baltneta	Artem Horodyskyi	cn25n
lmfy6	UP		Europe	Latvia	Riga 1 (rg1)	DEAC	Maksym Ishchenko	lh42a
7h3aw	UP		Europe	Romania	Bucharest (bu1)	M247	Iancu Aurel	c5ssg
3ppfv	UP		Asia	Singapore	Singapore (sg1)	Telin	OneSixtyTwo Digital Capital	d4bin
ocony	UP		Europe	Slovenia	Ljubljana 2 (lj2)	Anonstake	Anonstake	eu5wc
5u6dm	UP		North America	United States of America (the)	San Jose (sj2)	Digital Realty	BlockTech Ventures, LLC	eikix

---

You may wish to follow the CO.DELTA known neuron if you found this analysis helpful.

CO.DELTA △

We’re a verifiably decentralised collective who review IC deltas (changes applied by NNS proposals). We follow a common code:

• Look: We observe the details and context of NNS proposals
• Test: We test and verify the claims made by those proposals
• Automate: We automate as much as possible by building increasingly sophisticated tools that streamline and strengthen the reviewal process.

Every vote cast by CO.DELTA is the result of consensus among diligent, skilled and experienced team members acting independently. The CO.DELTA neuron follows the vote of D-QUORUM on NNS topics that the CO.DELTA team does not handle directly. You can therefore follow CO.DELTA on all topics and rely on the highest quality of vote.

---

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.

[ZackDS]

Proposal #136734 — Zack | CodeGov

Vote: Rejected
Reason:
The replacement Node qvguz is down.
Every node in the IM1 DC is offline

About CodeGov

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.

[MalithHatananchchige]

Proposal 136734 Review | Malith H - CO.DELTA △

VOTE: NO

TLDR:
This proposal removes 1 node(s) from Greater Noida 1 and adds 1 replacement node(s) in Douglas 1. Replacement node qvguz… seems to having a DC wide outage.

Subnet Details

Property	Value
ID	3hhby…
Type	application
Memory Usage	794.83 GB
Running Canisters	28011
Description	N/A

Provider Changes

Removed	Added
ACCUSET SOLUTIONS	Blue Ant LLC

Location Changes

Removed	Added
Asia, Greater Noida 1	Europe, Douglas 1

Nodes Removed 1

Node ID	Status	Provider	Data Center	Location
vte5d…	UP	ACCUSET SOLUTIONS	gn1	Greater Noida 1

Nodes Added 1

Node ID	Status	Provider	Data Center	Location
qvguz…	DOWN	Blue Ant LLC	im1	Douglas 1

Issues:

ISSUE: Node vte5d… is not degraded or dead as claimed.

ISSUE: Node qvguz… is in 'DOWN' status as required for addition.

Passes:

Node vte5d…: Remove from Subnet check passed.

Node qvguz…: Not assigned to any subnet.

You may wish to follow the CO.DELTA known neuron if you found this analysis helpful.

CO.DELTA

We’re a verifiably decentralised collective who review IC deltas (changes applied by NNS proposals). We follow a common code:

• Look: We observe the details and context of NNS proposals
• Test: We test and verify the claims made by those proposals
• Automate: We automate as much as possible by building increasingly sophisticated tools that streamline and strengthen the reviewal process.

Every vote cast by CO.DELTA is the result of consensus among diligent, skilled and experienced team members acting independently. The CO.DELTA neuron follows the vote of D-QUORUM on NNS topics that the CO.DELTA team does not handle directly. You can therefore follow CO.DELTA on all topics and rely on the highest quality of vote.

[timk11]

Proposal 136734 | Tim - CodeGov

Vote: Reject

This proposal replaces 1 node in subnet 3hhby, appearing in the decentralization tool as “UP”, for the purpose of replacing a dead node. The node provider rewards tool shows an obvious period of downtime.

The dashboard entry for this subnet shows a period in which less than 13 nodes are active, likely corresponding to this period of downtime.

Presumably there was an issue that has now been fixed.

Additionally, the replacement node qvguz appears as “Status: Offline” in the dashboard.

About CodeGov

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 & Neurons’ 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 decentralisation 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.

[LaCosta]

Proposal 136734 – LaCosta | CodeGov

Vote: REJECT

The proposal replaces 1 node on subnet 3hhby:

• Removes node vte5d Dashboard Status: Active.

• Adds node qvguz Dashboard Status: Offline.

The motivation of the proposal it’s to replace node vte5d which is advertised as dead but shows up as Active in the Dashboard. Meanwhile the node used for replacement, qvguz, is Offline.

Looking at the Node Provider Rewards we can see that node was definitely Offline at least for 3 days, but as of yesterday, May 25th, it seems to have come back Online.

Even though this node can be considered unstable as of the moment, since the alternative is a dead node I have voted to reject.

About CodeGov

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.