I’m working on a proof of concept optimisation approach that I’ll be happy to share shortly
Thanks @Sat. It’s not been my intention to insist that anything must be done, only that I will reject otherwise. My apologies for how this must come across, but I consider certain principles to be foundational to solid Web3 governance, and I will continue to reject proposals that do not meet those criteria (in particular, stating one thing in a motion proposal, and instead doing another thing in order to save time and effort). I’m happy to be more flexible if an official announcement can be made about the currently standing motion proposal.
Would someone from DFINITY be able to update the latest motion proposal topic to make this clear to all that have displayed an interest in this motion? This would make me feel much more comfortable about potentially adopting proposals that are at odds with the standing motion proposal (if it’s officially announced as suspended while further analysis is pending).
Interesting, thanks Sat. Does this mean that the SEV column in the IC target topology also needs disregarding for the time-being? I think this is another thing that could do with making clear in any updated motion.
This is also very interesting. So when new nodes are added to large subnets, such as the NNS, even if their status is UP, they may not actually be participating in consensus for quite a while. Is there any way of detecting when the node has become fully integrated into the subnet, and is contributing productively? Presumably there should be a hard cap on the number of nodes that should be swapped into a subnet at any one time (relative to the failure domain for that subnet). The proposal above swaps 4 in one go. Presumably if it swapped 9+1 nodes then the subnet would stall for an unknown length of time while the new nodes are getting up to speed?
Separate question, just out of interest, if an AddNodeToSubnet
proposal were raised today to move a node from one subnet to another (rather than selecting from the unassigned nodes), would this proposal fail or encounter other issues, or would it be expected to work?
Thanks for helping me get up to speed with all these things @Sat, I really appreciate your responses.