Proposal 134041
TLDR I’ve vote to adopt. The proposal summary appears to be accurate, and the change seems reasonable.
… a node operator 5njak currently does not have nodes in any subnet. To get insights into the stability of the nodes of this node operator, we propose to add one of the operator’s nodes to subnet brlsh
Claims made in the proposal summary can be validated via the IC API. Reviewing the returned JSON shows that the node operator 5njak operates a single node, which is indeed currently unassigned.
An UP node in the US is removed and replaced with this new US 5njak node. Relevant decentralisation metrics are unaffected by this change.
Decentralisation Stats
Subnet node distance stats (distance between any 2 nodes in the subnet) →
Smallest Distance | Average Distance | Largest Distance | |
---|---|---|---|
EXISTING | 443.007 km | 7099.094 km | 15062.77 km |
PROPOSED | 443.007 km | 7124.993 km (+0.4%) | 15939.092 km (+5.8%) |
This proposal slightly increases decentralisation, considered purely in terms of geographic distance (and therefore there’s a slight theoretical increase in localised disaster resilience).
Subnet characteristic counts →
Continents | Countries | Data Centers | Owners | Node Providers | Node Operator | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
EXISTING | 3 | 12 | 13 | 13 | 13 | 13 |
PROPOSED | 3 | 12 | 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 | 2 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 |
PROPOSED | 5 | 2 | 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)
Table
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.
Another good neuron to follow is Synapse (follows the LORIMER and CodeGov known neurons for Subnet Management, and is a generally well informed known neuron to follow on numerous other topics)