Proposal 134491
TLDR: The node that’s proposed to be added to this subnet is DOWN, while the node that is proposed to be removed is UP (well spotted @ZackDS). This would reduce the number of functional nodes in the subnet, so I have rejected this proposal.
Decentralisation Stats
Subnet node distance stats (distance between any 2 nodes in the subnet) →
| Smallest Distance | Average Distance | Largest Distance | |
|---|---|---|---|
| EXISTING | 0 km | 7497.062 km | 19448.574 km |
| PROPOSED | 0 km | 7317.281 km (-2.4%) | 19448.574 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 | 5 | 26 | 31 | 31 | 31 | 31 |
| PROPOSED | 5 | 27 (+3.7%) | 31 | 31 | 31 | 31 |
This proposal slightly improves decentralisation in terms of jurisdiction diversity (if the new node were actually up, but it’s not).
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 | 12 | 3 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 |
| PROPOSED | 13 (+8.33%) | 3 | 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 |  |
||||||||
| Add | 6hqi5 | DOWN | |
Europe | Portugal | Lisbon 2 (li2) | Edgoo Networks | Bitmoon | nvocp |
Other Nodes
| Node | Status | Continent | Country | Data Center | Owner | Node Provider | Node Operator | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| v27at | UP | |
Americas | Argentina | CABA 1 (ar1) | SyT - Servicios y Telecomunicaciones S.A. | Mariano Stoll | 5p6xp |
| zjiki | UP | |
Oceania | Australia | Queensland 1 (sc1) | NEXTDC | ANYPOINT PTY LTD | srrm2 |
| xu2zg | UP | |
Europe | Belgium | Antwerp (an1) | Datacenter United | Allusion | pgunx |
| x3cey | UP | |
Americas | Canada | Toronto (to1) | Cyxtera | Blockchain Development Labs | 6oxlv |
| v2pkj | UP | |
Europe | Switzerland | Zurich 3 (zh3) | Nine.Ch | Tomahawk.vc | anodw |
| w4ri3 | UP | |
Asia | China | HongKong 1 (hk1) | Unicom | Pindar Technology Limited | vzsx4 |
| aajth | UP | |
Americas | Costa Rica | Bogota 1 (bg1) | EdgeUno | Geeta Kalwani | 74vhn |
| zgtrt | UP | |
Europe | Czechia | South Moravian Region 1 (bn1) | Master Internet | Maksym Ishchenko | c3oqp |
| yi6r6 | UP | |
Europe | Spain | Madrid 1 (ma1) | Ginernet | Ivanov Oleksandr | qyawb |
| zgeaf | UP | |
Europe | Estonia | Tallinn 2 (ta2) | Telia DC | Artem Horodyskyi | rhtt6 |
| atjbz | UP | |
Europe | France | Paris 1 (pr1) | Celeste | Carbon Twelve | g3nqx |
| 3jol6 | UP | |
Europe | United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland (the) | London 1 (ld1) | Latitude.sh | Conic Ventures | raiov |
| uouxk | UP | |
Asia | Georgia | Tbilisi 1 (tb1) | Cloud9 | George Bassadone | yhfy4 |
| q3vac | UP | |
Europe | Croatia | Zagreb 1 (zg1) | Anonstake | Anonstake | 3sm7v |
| ecxbl | UP | |
Asia | India | Navi Mumbai 1 (nm1) | Rivram | Rivram Inc | mpmyf |
| 67t6p | UP | |
Asia | India | New Delhi 1 (nd1) | Marvelous Web3 DC | Marvelous Web3 | ri4lg |
| dyycg | UP | |
Asia | India | Panvel 2 (pl2) | Yotta | Krishna Enterprises | 7rw6b |
| rfkza | UP | |
Asia | Israel | Tel Aviv 1 (tv1) | Interhost | GeoNodes LLC | lis4o |
| go5zz | UP | |
Asia | Japan | Tokyo (ty1) | Equinix | Starbase | cqjev |
| wjwzb | UP | |
Asia | Korea (the Republic of) | Seoul 2 (kr2) | Gasan | Web3game | 5dwhe |
| fhg3q | UP | |
Asia | Sri Lanka | Colombo 1 (cm1) | OrionStellar | Geodd Pvt Ltd | ywjtr |
| qlk52 | UP | |
Europe | Latvia | Riga 1 (rg1) | DEAC | MB Patrankos šūvis | jptla |
| g4avo | UP | |
Europe | Romania | Bucharest (bu1) | M247 | Iancu Aurel | c5ssg |
| qp3lh | UP | |
Asia | Singapore | Singapore 2 (sg2) | Telin | OneSixtyTwo Digital Capital | qffmn |
| 6adxp | UP | |
Europe | Slovenia | Ljubljana (lj1) | Posita.si | Fractal Labs AG | gl27f |
| vgfnl | UP | |
Europe | Sweden | Stockholm 1 (sh1) | Digital Realty | DFINITY Operations SA | lgp6d |
| vqucp | UP | |
Americas | United States of America (the) | Atlanta 2 (at2) | Datasite | Giant Leaf, LLC | bmlhw |
| y7bml | UP | |
Americas | United States of America (the) | Panama City 1 (pc1) | Navegalo | Bianca-Martina Rohner | qaes5 |
| kgo2t | UP | |
Africa | South Africa | Cape Town 2 (ct2) | Teraco | Kontrapunt (Pty) Ltd | x7fjr |
| kwryq | UP | |
Africa | South Africa | Gauteng 3 (jb3) | Xneelo | Wolkboer (Pty) Ltd | ymenq |
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.