This topic is intended to capture Subnet Management activities over time for the opn46 subnet, providing a place to ask questions and make observations about the management of this subnet.
3 Likes
DFINITY will submit an NNS proposal today to reduce the notarization delay on the subnet, opn46, similar to what has happened on other subnets in recent weeks (you can find all details in this forum thread).
3 Likes
Voted to adopt proposal 133076. The initial_notary_delay_millis is set to 300 and the subnet_id is correct.
Proposal 133447
1 down node switched out for another node at the same location, same node provider. Looks good, I’ve voted to adopt.
Decentralisation Stats
Subnet node distance stats (distance between any 2 nodes in the subnet) →
| Smallest Distance | Average Distance | Largest Distance | |
|---|---|---|---|
| EXISTING | 449.292 km | 8454.39 km | 16978.647 km |
| PROPOSED | 449.292 km | 8454.39 km | 16978.647 km |
Subnet characteristic counts →
| Continents | Countries | Data Centers | Owners | Node Providers | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| EXISTING | 5 | 12 | 13 | 13 | 13 |
| PROPOSED | 5 | 12 | 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 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| EXISTING | 5 | 2 | 1 | 1 | 1 |
| PROPOSED | 5 | 2 | 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)
2 Likes
Voted to adopt proposal 133447.
Having IC_PrometheusTargetMissing Degraded node replaced by a healthy one from the
same provider Sygnum Bank has no changing effect on decentralization.
Voted to adopt proposal 133447.
This proposal replaces node 2kvun which appears in the dashboard as “Status: Degraded / Status Details: IC_PrometheusTargetMissing”. As shown in the proposal and verified using the DRE tool, decentralisation parameters are unchanged and remain within the requirements of the target topology.
Voted to adopt proposal 133447. The proposal replaces the degraded node 2kvun (Dashboard Status: Degraded, IC_PrometheusTargetMissing) with the node ahbuw on subnet opn46. There is no impact in the Nakamoto Coefficients as verified through the Dre tool.
Voted to adopt proposal 134281. The proposal seeks to remove a cordoned node from the subnet and specifies that the associated data centre is being offboarded “after 48 months”. Decentralisation parameters are unchanged.The necessary context is provided by this forum post and associated discussion. For future proposals of this type I recommend that the background context be included in the proposal text for ease of verification.
I’ve voted to reject proposal 134281. It makes claims that I see no clear way of verifying, and supporting statements regarding the ownership of the data centre are inconsistent with records held in the IC registry. The proposal was announced here.
Voted to adopt proposal 134281. This proposal is part of a sequence of steps to remove cordoned nodes from subnets as the associated data centeres are being offboarded after 48 months of their respective DC contracts that are still private and were signed up before the Genesis. There is a great and detailed explanation of this changes in this forum post and the forum thread it is in. In the wiki there is a series of Steps for Gen-1 Node onboarding after 48 months that need to be followed in order for the nodes to continue earning rewards which starts by making a forum post in the following thread. As we can verify no one as come forward with nodes from the DCs in this proposals so I don’t see any issues with the removal of this nodes.
A new proposal with id 134555 has been submitted, please take a look.
Click here to open proposal details
Replace nodes in subnet opn46
Motivation:
The following nodes in subnet opn46 have been cordoned and need to be removed from the subnet:
- ahbuw: offboarding ZH5 DC after 48 months; Proposal: Update Interim Gen-1 Node Provider Remuneration After 48 months - #27 by Sygnum
- eukqc: offboarding SG3 DC after 48 months; New Node Provider Proposals - #581 by 162DC
Decentralization Nakamoto coefficient changes for subnet opn46-zyspe-hhmyp-4zu6u-7sbrh-dok77-m7dch-im62f-vyimr-a3n2c-4ae:
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:
ahbuw-hjqct-utupn-vhttv-omfcl-ukoi6-gpdm7-guc5d-ikx46-x3kfu-fqe[health: healthy]eukqc-dmuix-aquwg-q6bzs-cqjg3-uh6xu-x7tyt-myggw-qxuec-sgwcl-gqe[health: healthy]
Nodes added:
oaxev-miabf-nxzvk-inhz4-67wdw-urlun-euywx-656kk-iffmy-3gdp4-2ae[health: healthy]o2ejh-i3l5b-tawnx-6vane-ek7hi-apzj2-d2vid-j5dro-xityu-sszcb-gqe[health: healthy]
node_provider data_center data_center_owner area country
------------- ----------- ----------------- ---- -------
6nbcy-kprg6-ax3db-kh3cz-7jllk-oceyh-jznhs-riguq-fvk6z-6tsds-rqe 1 aw1 1 Africa Data Centres 1 Gauteng 1 AU 1
6r5lw-l7db7-uwixn-iw5en-yy55y-ilbtq-e6gcv-g22r2-j3g6q-y37jk-jqe 1 jb2 1 Anonstake 1 Ljubljana 1 CA 1
7a4u2-gevsy-5c5fs-hsgri-n2kdz-dxxwf-btcfp-jykro-l4y7c-7xky2-aqe 1 kr1 1 Coolhousing 1 Navi Mumbai 1 CH 1
7at4h-nhtvt-a4s55-jigss-wr2ha-ysxkn-e6w7x-7ggnm-qd3d5-ry66r-cae 1 lj2 1 Cyxtera 1 Ontario 1 CZ 1
bvcsg-3od6r-jnydw-eysln-aql7w-td5zn-ay5m6-sibd2-jzojt-anwag-mqe 1 nm1 1 Digital Realty 1 Panama City 1 IN 1
diyay-s4rfq-xnx23-zczwi-nptra-5254n-e4zn6-p7tqe-vqhzr-sd4gd-bqe 1 pa2 1 Equinix 1 Pennsylvania 1 JP 1
eatbv-nlydd-n655c-g7j7p-gnmpz-pszdg-6e6et-veobv-ftz2y-4m752-vqe 1 pc1 1 Green.ch 1 Praha 1 KR 1
kos24-5xact-6aror-uofg2-tnvt6-dq3bk-c2c5z-jtptt-jbqvc-lmegy-qae 1 sc1 1 KT 1 Queensland 1 PA 1
nmdd6-rouxw-55leh-wcbkn-kejit-njvje-p4s6e-v64d3-nlbjb-vipul-mae 1 sg1 0 -> 1 NEXTDC 1 Seoul 1 SE 1
r3yjn-kthmg-pfgmb-2fngg-5c7d7-t6kqg-wi37r-j7gy6-iee64-kjdja-jae 1 sg3 1 -> 0 Navegalo 1 Singapore 1 SG 1
sixix-2nyqd-t2k2v-vlsyz-dssko-ls4hl-hyij4-y7mdp-ja6cj-nsmpf-yae 1 sh1 1 Racks Central 1 -> 0 Stockholm 1 SI 1
ulyfm-vkxtj-o42dg-e4nam-l4tzf-37wci-ggntw-4ma7y-d267g-ywxi6-iae 1 to2 1 Rivram 1 Tokyo 1 US 1
unqqg-no4b2-vbyad-ytik2-t3vly-3e57q-aje2t-sjb5l-bd4ke-chggn-uqe 1 ty1 1 Telin 0 -> 1 Zurich 1 ZA 1
zh5 1 -> 0 Tierpoint 1
zh6 0 -> 1
1 Like
Proposal 134555
TLDR: I’ll adopt. The proposal links directly to what appears to be discussion with the NP about the proposal. Decentralisation stats look good.
Decentralisation Stats
Subnet node distance stats (distance between any 2 nodes in the subnet) →
| Smallest Distance | Average Distance | Largest Distance | |
|---|---|---|---|
| EXISTING | 138.676 km | 8231.941 km | 16748.078 km |
| PROPOSED | 138.676 km | 8231.941 km | 16748.078 km |
Subnet characteristic counts →
| Continents | Countries | Data Centers | Owners | Node Providers | Node Operator | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| EXISTING | 5 | 12 | 13 | 13 | 13 | 13 |
| PROPOSED | 5 | 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)
Node Changes
| Action | Node | Status | Continent | Country | Data Center | Owner | Node Provider | Node Operator | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Remove |  |
||||||||
| Remove | |
||||||||
| Add | oaxev | UNASSIGNED | |
Europe | Switzerland | Zurich 6 (zh6) | Green.ch | Sygnum Bank | ciprs |
| Add | o2ejh | UNASSIGNED | |
Asia | Singapore | Singapore (sg1) | Telin | OneSixtyTwo Digital Capital | d4bin |
Other Nodes
| Node | Status | Continent | Country | Data Center | Owner | Node Provider | Node Operator | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| mtr6i | UP | |
Oceania | Australia | Queensland 1 (sc1) | NEXTDC | Karel Frank | f3toa |
| uf3xb | UP | |
Europe | Belgium | Seoul 3 (kr1) | KT | Pindar Technology Limited | iubpe |
| vaqrd | UP | |
Americas | Canada | Toronto 2 (to2) | Cyxtera | Blockchain Development Labs | 4lp6i |
| cl43a | UP | |
Europe | Czechia | Praha 2 (pa2) | Coolhousing | Artem Horodyskyi | dm2ty |
| awmdh | UP | |
Asia | India | Navi Mumbai 1 (nm1) | Rivram | Rivram Inc | mpmyf |
| icl45 | UP | |
Asia | Japan | Tokyo (ty1) | Equinix | Starbase | cqjev |
| qkcyr | UP | |
Europe | Slovenia | Ljubljana 2 (lj2) | Anonstake | Anonstake | eu5wc |
| bafm2 | UP | |
Europe | Sweden | Stockholm 1 (sh1) | Digital Realty | DFINITY Stiftung | lgp6d |
| yujwb | UP | |
Americas | United States of America (the) | Allentown (aw1) | Tierpoint | Bigger Capital | codio |
| euo2x | UP | |
Americas | United States of America (the) | Panama City 1 (pc1) | Navegalo | Bianca-Martina Rohner | qaes5 |
| wwpob | UP | |
Africa | South Africa | Gauteng 2 (jb2) | Africa Data Centres | Honeycomb Capital (Pty) Ltd | 3bohy |
*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)
- 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)
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.
Voted to adopt proposal #134555.
The proposal replaces two cordoned healthy Active status node ahbuw from the ZH5 Data Center in Zurich 5, and cordoned healthy Active status node eukqc from the SG3 Data Center in Singapore 3, with unassigned healthy Awaiting status node oaxev from Zurich 6 and with unassigned healthy Awaiting status node o2ejh from Singapore 1, without any change to the decentralization of the subnet.
The motivation makes sense and the provided Forum link included in the summary provides further info, also it can be checked here.
Voted to adopt proposal 134555.
This proposal replaces 2 nodes, due to offboarding ZH5 and SG3 data centres. Decentralisation parameters are unchanged and remain within the requirements of the target topology. Data centre details are consistent with the links provided in the proposal.
Proposal 134555
Vote: ADOPT
Replaces cordoned nodes ahbuw and eukqc with nodes oaxev and o2ejh on subnet opn46.
The reason for this proposal is to offboard ZH5 and SG3 DCs consistent with forum posts made on the forum thread used for posts regarding the renovation/sell of Gen-1 node machines by NPs.
Both the NP and DC stated in the forum post match the ones from the node being removed in the proposal.
There’s an open A new proposal with ID 135434 has been submitted, please take a look.
Click here to open proposal details
Replace a node in subnet opn46
Motivation:
- replacing dead node yujwb
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 opn46-zyspe-hhmyp-4zu6u-7sbrh-dok77-m7dch-im62f-vyimr-a3n2c-4ae:
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:
yujwb-ujbfv-apyte-q7roz-xophj-77vdu-3p7uu-kb3lu-wlyiw-srv6b-aae[health: dead]
Nodes added:
bq47i-nl3wp-zbsv3-juxt5-ptcqw-wfm6e-eqv5e-m3y4e-w6xgk-z7rmw-eqe[health: healthy]
node_provider data_center data_center_owner area country
------------- ----------- ----------------- ---- -------
6nbcy-kprg6-ax3db-kh3cz-7jllk-oceyh-jznhs-riguq-fvk6z-6tsds-rqe 1 aw1 1 -> 0 Africa Data Centres 1 Gauteng 1 AU 1
6r5lw-l7db7-uwixn-iw5en-yy55y-ilbtq-e6gcv-g22r2-j3g6q-y37jk-jqe 1 dl1 0 -> 1 Anonstake 1 Ljubljana 1 CA 1
7a4u2-gevsy-5c5fs-hsgri-n2kdz-dxxwf-btcfp-jykro-l4y7c-7xky2-aqe 1 -> 0 jb2 1 Coolhousing 1 Navi Mumbai 1 CH 1
7at4h-nhtvt-a4s55-jigss-wr2ha-ysxkn-e6w7x-7ggnm-qd3d5-ry66r-cae 1 kr1 1 Cyxtera 1 Ontario 1 CZ 1
bvcsg-3od6r-jnydw-eysln-aql7w-td5zn-ay5m6-sibd2-jzojt-anwag-mqe 1 lj2 1 Digital Realty 1 Panama City 1 IN 1
diyay-s4rfq-xnx23-zczwi-nptra-5254n-e4zn6-p7tqe-vqhzr-sd4gd-bqe 1 nm1 1 Equinix 1 Pennsylvania 1 -> 0 JP 1
eatbv-nlydd-n655c-g7j7p-gnmpz-pszdg-6e6et-veobv-ftz2y-4m752-vqe 1 pa2 1 Flexential 0 -> 1 Praha 1 KR 1
eipr5-izbom-neyqh-s3ec2-52eww-cyfpg-qfomg-3dpwj-4pffh-34xcu-7qe 0 -> 1 pc1 1 Green.ch 1 Queensland 1 PA 1
kos24-5xact-6aror-uofg2-tnvt6-dq3bk-c2c5z-jtptt-jbqvc-lmegy-qae 1 sc1 1 KT 1 Seoul 1 SE 1
nmdd6-rouxw-55leh-wcbkn-kejit-njvje-p4s6e-v64d3-nlbjb-vipul-mae 1 sg1 1 NEXTDC 1 Singapore 1 SG 1
r3yjn-kthmg-pfgmb-2fngg-5c7d7-t6kqg-wi37r-j7gy6-iee64-kjdja-jae 1 sh1 1 Navegalo 1 Stockholm 1 SI 1
sixix-2nyqd-t2k2v-vlsyz-dssko-ls4hl-hyij4-y7mdp-ja6cj-nsmpf-yae 1 to2 1 Rivram 1 Texas 0 -> 1 US 1
ulyfm-vkxtj-o42dg-e4nam-l4tzf-37wci-ggntw-4ma7y-d267g-ywxi6-iae 1 ty1 1 Telin 1 Tokyo 1 ZA 1
unqqg-no4b2-vbyad-ytik2-t3vly-3e57q-aje2t-sjb5l-bd4ke-chggn-uqe 1 zh6 1 Tierpoint 1 -> 0 Zurich 1
Proposal 135434 | Tim - CodeGov
Vote: Adopt
This proposal replaces 1 node in subnet opn46, appearing in the decentralization tool as “DOWN”. 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.
Proposal 135434 Review | Lorimer - CO.DELTA â–ł
VOTE: YES
TLDR: One offline node replaced with an unassigned node. IC Target Topology metrics remain unchanged, but the average distance between nodes increases slightly.
Country Discrepancies (1)
There a relatively large country discrepancy (in terms of distance). Given that ipinfo.io uses a probe network for geolocation, I’m surprised to see such a large discrepancy. Something to revisit (given that the node in question isn’t directly affected by this proposal).
| Node | Data Center | Claimed Country | According to ipinfo.io |
|---|---|---|---|
| vaqrd | 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 | 445.323 km | 8853.356 km | 18825.967 km |
| PROPOSED | 445.323 km | 8980.107 km (+1.4%) | 18825.967 km |
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 | 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 | 4 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 |
| PROPOSED | 4 | 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
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.
Node Changes
| Action | Node | Status | Continent | Country | Data Center | Owner | Node Provider | Node Operator | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Remove | |
||||||||
| Add | bq47i | UNASSIGNED | |
North America | United States of America (the) | Dallas (dl1) | Flexential | 87m Neuron, LLC | mw64v |
Other Nodes
| Node | Status | Continent | Country | Data Center | Owner | Node Provider | Node Operator | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| mtr6i | UP | |
Oceania | Australia | Queensland 1 (sc1) | NEXTDC | Karel Frank | f3toa |
| vaqrd | UP | |
North America | Canada | Toronto 2 (to2) | Cyxtera | Blockchain Development Labs | 4lp6i |
| oaxev | UP | |
Europe | Switzerland | Zurich 6 (zh6) | Green.ch | Sygnum Bank | ciprs |
| cl43a | UP | |
Europe | Czechia | Praha 2 (pa2) | Coolhousing | Artem Horodyskyi | dm2ty |
| awmdh | UP | |
Asia | India | Navi Mumbai 1 (nm1) | Rivram | Rivram Inc | mpmyf |
| icl45 | UP | |
Asia | Japan | Tokyo (ty1) | Equinix | Starbase | cqjev |
| uf3xb | UP | |
Asia | Korea (the Republic of) | Seoul 3 (kr1) | KT | Pindar Technology Limited | iubpe |
| euo2x | UP | |
North America | Panama | Panama City 1 (pc1) | Navegalo | Bianca-Martina Rohner | qaes5 |
| bafm2 | UP | |
Europe | Sweden | Stockholm 1 (sh1) | Digital Realty | DFINITY Stiftung | lgp6d |
| o2ejh | UP | |
Asia | Singapore | Singapore (sg1) | Telin | OneSixtyTwo Digital Capital | d4bin |
| qkcyr | UP | |
Europe | Slovenia | Ljubljana 2 (lj2) | Anonstake | Anonstake | eu5wc |
| wwpob | UP | |
Africa | South Africa | Gauteng 2 (jb2) | Africa Data Centres | Honeycomb Capital (Pty) Ltd | 3bohy |
You may wish to follow the CO.DELTA known neuron (coming soon) if you found this analysis helpful.
CO.DELTA â–ł
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.