This topic is intended to capture Subnet Management activities over time for the qdvhd subnet, providing a place to ask questions and make observations about the management of this subnet.
At the time of creating this topic the current subnet configuration is as follows:
DFINITY will submit a proposal today to reduce the notarization delay on the subnet, qdvhd , similar to what has happened on other subnets in recent weeks (you can find all details in this forum thread).
Voted to adopt proposal 134284. 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.
Voted to adopt proposal 134284. 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.
Voted to reject proposal 134575 as this is part of a large batch of non-critical proposals timed such that the voting period clashes with national holidays, thereby allowing insufficient time for an appropriately detailed review to take place.
Rejected proposal 134575. There’s no time to review this and the 18 other proposals in the same batch properly over Xmas eve, Xmas and Boxing Day. This is a non-critical proposal.
Replaces cordoned nodes 2hl5j and egsow with nodes spr2z and njrl2 on subnet qdvhd.
The reason for this proposal is to offboard TY2 and AN1 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 and forum post match the ones from the node being removed in the proposal.
The proposal replaces two cordoned nodes, one healthy Active status node 2hl5j from the TY2 Data Center in Tokyo, and cordoned healthy Active status node egsow from the AN1 Data Center in Belgium, with unassigned healthy Awaiting status node spr2z from Germany and with unassigned healthy Awaiting status node njrl2 from Australia, 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.
TLDR: Key decentralisation metrics are unchanged. There is a clear public declaration for the cordoned node which is referred to in the proposal summary.
1 cordoned node replaced with a healthy node in Canada.
Decentralisation Stats
Subnet node distance stats (distance between any 2 nodes in the subnet) →
Smallest Distance
Average Distance
Largest Distance
EXISTING
138.676 km
7413.809 km
16672.927 km
PROPOSED
138.676 km
7449.58 km (+0.5%)
16672.927 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
4
12
13
13
13
13
PROPOSED
4
12
13
13
13
13
Largest number of nodes with the same characteristic (e.g. continent, country, data center, etc.) →
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)
*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.
This proposal replaces node errkk which appears in the dashboard as “Status: Active” for the stated reason “offboarding TO1 DC after 48 months”. 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 topics and Synapse on most other 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 and KongSwap with a known neuron and credible Followees.
Learn more about CodeGov and its mission at codegov.org.
Vote: Adopted Reason:
The proposal replaces cordoned healthy Active status node errkk from Toronto1, with
unassigned healthy Awaiting status node mqriv from Toronto2, 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.
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 topics and Synapse on most other 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 and KongSwap with a known neuron and credible Followees.
Learn more about CodeGov and its mission at codegov.org.
Replaces cordoned node errkk with node mqriv on subnet qdvhd.
The reason for this proposal is to offboard the TO1 DC 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.
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 topics and Synapse on most other 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 and KongSwap with a known neuron and credible Followees.
Learn more about CodeGov and its mission at codegov.org.
