Proposal 133152
This proposal proposes replacing one degraded node, and also replacing an up node in order to improve decentralisation. As detailed and illustrated below, the most number of nodes in the same country is reduced by this proposal from 3 to 2. This proposal therefore brings this subnet back in line with the IC Target Topology. I’ve voted to adopt 
The most number of nodes in the same continent is actually increased by this proposal (decreasing decentralisation in these terms), however this metric isn’t currently considered by the formal IC Target Topology.
Decentralisation Stats
Subnet node distance stats (distance between any 2 nodes in the subnet) →
| Smallest Distance | Average Distance | Largest Distance | |
|---|---|---|---|
| EXISTING | 0 km | 7703.64 km | 16759.085 km |
| PROPOSED | 0 km | 7158.186 km (-7.1%) | 16759.085 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 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| EXISTING | 4 | 10 | 13 | 13 | 13 |
| PROPOSED | 4 | 11 (+9.1%) | 13 | 13 | 13 |
This proposal improves decentralisation in terms of jurisdiction diversity.
Largest number of nodes with the same characteristic (e.g. continent, country, data center, etc.) →
| Continent | Country | Data Center | Owner | Node Provider | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| EXISTING | 6 | 3 | 1 | 1 | 1 |
| PROPOSED | 7 (+16.67%) | 2 (-33.34%) | 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.
Other good neurons to follow:
-
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)
-
CodeGov (actively reviews and votes on Subnet Management proposals, and is well informed on numerous other technical topics)
-
WaterNeuron (the WaterNeuron DAO frequently discuss proposals like this in order to vote responsibly based on DAO consensus)