Subnet Management - x33ed (Application SNS)

[alexu]

Hi @timk11 ! Yes, new clusters should have additional motivation. Thanks for bringing this up!

[alexu]

Proposal 136574 replaces a dead node and cordons off the Web3 game node in that subnet. Since the Web3 game is going to change its IPv6 subnet soon, we are moving their nodes off active subnets upon their request.

See also proposals: 136574-136579

[Lorimer]

Proposal 136574 Review | Lorimer - CO.DELTA △

VOTE: YES

TLDR: If it weren’t for the offline node that’s being replaced by this proposal, I would reject it like the others submitted in this batch. Other than swapping out a healthy node based on uncorroborated claims about the node provider’s intentions, there’s an offline node that’s being replaced by an unassigned node.

Decentralisation stats are also improved by this proposal, increasing the average geographic distance between nodes, and increasing jurisdiction diversity.

Country Discrepancies (3)

@Lorimer

@alexu, can I ask where RIPE Atlas locates this node? I’ve not yet set myself up on the network, so don’t have any credits in order to check. I also noticed that my prior checks on an earlier discussion using ipinfo.io may have been inaccurate simply due to a stale local cache that I was using. I’ve just cleared it out and these are the results I’m getting for this node at the moment. Curious to see how that matches up with what you get.

Node	Data Center	Claimed Country	According to ipinfo.io
2xph2	Panama City 1	Panama	South Africa
izmdg	South Moravian Region 1	Czechia	Austria
wwwxf	Geneva 2	Switzerland	Germany

Decentralisation Stats

Subnet node distance stats (distance between any 2 nodes in the subnet) →

	Smallest Distance	Average Distance	Largest Distance
EXISTING	0.054 km	7905.954 km	19325.937 km
PROPOSED	0.054 km (-0.1%)	8079.455 km (+2.2%)	19447.697 km (+0.6%)

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	6	23	34	34	34	34
PROPOSED	6	24 (+4.2%)	34	34	34	34

This proposal slightly 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	Node Operator
EXISTING	15	3	1	1	1	1
PROPOSED	15	3	1	1	1	1

See here for acceptable limits → Motion 135700

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	dtf67	UP		Asia	Hong Kong	HongKong 4 (hk4)	hkntt	Web3game	dg7of
Remove	r7few	DOWN		Europe	Romania	Bucharest (bu1)	M247	Iancu Aurel	c5ssg
Add	5resh	UNASSIGNED		South America	Argentina	CABA 1 (ar1)	SyT - Servicios y Telecomunicaciones S.A.	Mariano Stoll	5p6xp
Add	cq5nh	UNASSIGNED		Europe	Romania	Bucharest (bu1)	M247	Iancu Aurel	c5ssg

Other Nodes

Node	Status		Continent	Country	Data Center	Owner	Node Provider	Node Operator
hrhn3	UP		Oceania	Australia	Melbourne 2 (mn2)	NEXTDC	Icaria Systems Pty Ltd	l5lhp
j3pcf	UP		Oceania	Australia	New South Wales 1 (ns1)	Latitude.sh	Conic Ventures	h6fpp
xnraq	UP		Europe	Belgium	Brussels (br1)	Digital Realty	Allusion	mjeqs
f7hyn	UP		North America	Canada	Quebec l1 (mtl1)	Leaseweb	Marvelous Web3	ueggl
m6pbx	UP		North America	Canada	Vancouver (bc1)	Cyxtera	Blockchain Development Labs	feb2q
wwwxf	UP		Europe	Switzerland	Geneva 2 (ge2)	SafeHost	Extragone SA	5atxd
y7vmg	UP		Europe	Switzerland	Zurich 2 (zh2)	Everyware	DFINITY Stiftung	rzskv
7pvxh	UP		South America	Colombia	Bogota 1 (bg1)	EdgeUno	Geeta Kalwani	74vhn
5irn3	UP		Europe	Czechia	Praha 2 (pa2)	Coolhousing	Vladyslav Popov	6hl6v
izmdg	UP		Europe	Czechia	South Moravian Region 1 (bn1)	Master Internet	Lukas Helebrandt	zc635
yyjdt	UP		Europe	Estonia	Tallinn 1 (ta1)	InfonetDC	Maksym Ishchenko	z7r2x
pbva7	UP		Europe	Spain	Madrid 1 (ma1)	Ginernet	Bohatyrov Volodymyr	wzrq6
oobdg	UP		Europe	France	Paris 1 (pr1)	Celeste	Carbon Twelve	g3nqx
phgey	UP		Asia	Hong Kong	HongKong 1 (hk1)	Unicom	Pindar Technology Limited	vzsx4
efnid	UP		Asia	India	Greater Noida 1 (gn1)	Yotta	ACCUSET SOLUTIONS	slaxf
dnt7y	UP		Asia	India	Navi Mumbai 1 (nm1)	Rivram	Rivram Inc	mpmyf
qnn43	UP		Asia	Japan	Tokyo (ty1)	Equinix	Starbase	cqjev
7pch3	UP		Asia	Korea (the Republic of)	Seoul 1 (sl1)	Megazone Cloud	Neptune Partners	ukji3
bv2x3	UP		Asia	Sri Lanka	Colombo 1 (cm1)	OrionStellar	Geodd Pvt Ltd	ywjtr
zk7wk	UP		Europe	Lithuania	Vilnius 1 (bt1)	Baltneta	MB Patrankos šūvis	mbnsu
2xph2	UP		North America	Panama	Panama City 1 (pc1)	Navegalo	Bianca-Martina Rohner	qaes5
catzb	UP		Europe	Poland	Warszawa 3 (wa3)	DataHouse	Ivanov Oleksandr	rhuve
u3ahx	UP		Europe	Portugal	Lisbon 1 (li1)	Dotsi	Artem Horodyskyi	y2spu
6hqi5	UP		Europe	Portugal	Lisbon 2 (li2)	Edgoo Networks	Bitmoon	nvocp
i5xgw	UP		Asia	Singapore	Singapore 2 (sg2)	Telin	OneSixtyTwo Digital Capital	qffmn
pm6hc	UP		Europe	Slovenia	Ljubljana 2 (lj2)	Anonstake	Anonstake	eu5wc
vcl5k	UP		Europe	Slovenia	Maribor (mb1)	Posita.si	Fractal Labs AG	3xiew
dwcjo	UP		North America	United States of America (the)	Jacksonville (jv1)	Tierpoint	Rivonia Holdings LLC	stqij
oh5wh	UP		North America	United States of America (the)	Las Vegas (lv1)	Flexential	87m Neuron, LLC	gsps3
ct3c3	UP		North America	United States of America (the)	Utah 1 (dr1)	FiberState	Privoxy Solutions, LLC	nhr3z
nxeqo	UP		Africa	South Africa	Cape Town 1 (ct1)	Africa Data Centres	Illusions In Art (Pty) Ltd	2aemz
5osj4	UP		Africa	South Africa	Gauteng 3 (jb3)	Xneelo	Wolkboer (Pty) Ltd	ymenq

---

You may wish to follow the CO.DELTA known neuron if you found this analysis helpful.

CO.DELTA △

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.

[Lorimer]

@alexu

Proposal 136574 replaces a dead node and cordons off the Web3 game node in that subnet. Since the Web3 game is going to change its IPv6 subnet soon, we are moving their nodes off active subnets upon their request.

Hi @alexu, I’ve rejected most of the proposals relating to Web3 game nodes based on the following reasoning and context →

Subnet Management - pjljw (Application)

HI @DRE-Team, why wasn’t the prior agreed procedure followed for this proposal? I see no forum post by the NP that’s clearly linked to.

I’m obviously only one voter among a teams of reviewers in CO.DELTA. For the benefit of reviews and votes that follow, could you please provide a reference to public discussion with the node provider in question (as a means of corroborating the claims in the proposal i.e. that this node provider is in fact expecting and aligned with these proposals, given that there’s no other reason for performing the node swap)?

I gave more commentary about my stance on this in this proposal review, but if there’s anything unclear about why I consider this sort of thing to be so important, please let me know so that I can clarify. Thanks.

[alexu]

Hi Alex @Lorimer !

I submitted these proposals because the usual suspects of the DRE team are currently dealing with other tasks. Since this was my first time submitting such subnet reconfiguration proposals, I guess I didn’t do it in the way that the reviewers fully expected.

Web3game is updating its ISP and, as a result, will get new ranges of IPv4 and IPv6 addresses, which means they have to reinstall the nodes, which also means we need to move their nodes out of the active subnets before they can remove them from the registry themselves to do the reinstall.

The discussion took place in the Web3game Matrix channel. I have asked the relevant NP to come to the forum and confirm if this is needed.

[Lorimer]

@alexu

I have asked the relevant NP to come to the forum and confirm

Thanks @alexu! I think this will be useful for any reviews that follow

[Webgame]

Confirmation
Due to contractual reasons, we need to replace the network operator, but the geographical location of the data center will remain unchanged. Both IPv4 and IPv6 will change, and after the complete withdrawal of the subnet, we will reinstall the node servers using the new IPv4 and IPv6.
Thank you @alexu for submitting the proposal for us.

[timk11]

Proposal 136574 | Tim - CodeGov

Vote: Adopt

This proposal replaces node r7few in subnet x33ed, appearing in the decentralization tool as “DOWN”, along with an additional node at the request of its node provider (Web3game). As shown in the proposal, decentralisation parameters are improved with respect to country 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.

[aligatorr89]

Proposal 136574 Review | aligatorr - CO.DELTA △

VOTE: YES

TLDR: Replaces unhealthy node - down for 20+ days. Replaces Hong-Kong node which reduces 2->1 in the region, also on claims that they want to do an infra upgrade.

• 1 Nakamoto parameters city: Lisbon above max identical count!!!
• Proposed topology Nakamoto Coefficient is better than current.

Node Changes 2 removed, 2 added

Node ID	Status	Country	City	Node Provider	Data Center	Data Center Owner
dtf67-kbgf3-apiap-nxgwu-wtt3w-53scu-ep2yk-rfqm2-ccwod-jkdsh-tae → 5resh-f6n7z-xxkbq-7lpod-spptk-nyt7n-tcvf6-f5ecb-ixxwc-6k5ai-rqe	UP → UNASSIGNED	HK → AR	HongKong → CABA	Web3game → Mariano Stoll	hk4 → ar1	hkntt → SyT - Servicios y Telecomunicaciones S.A.
r7few-pljgn-iynmr-iprtj-p66dg-qpc5m-2tx4m-245oc-6dzgk-pu2wy-dae → cq5nh-ez2pp-dwce6-o5olk-bckwf-vxyhb-ahine-jsczg-6g5ri-uj3kx-fqe	DOWN → UNASSIGNED	RO → RO	Bucuresti → Bucuresti	Iancu Aurel → Iancu Aurel	bu1 → bu1	M247 → M247

Current Nakamoto Coefficients and Topology, avg = 10.40

Attribute	Nakamoto Coefficient	Identical attribute values	Max allowed identical values	Unique Counts
Country	6		3	23
City	10	2->Lisbon, 2->HongKong	1	32
Data Center	12		1	34
Data Center Owner	12		1	34
Node Provider ID	12		1	34

Proposed Nakamoto Coefficients and Topology, avg = 10.60

Attribute	Nakamoto Coefficient	Identical attribute values	Max allowed identical values	Unique Counts
Country	6		3	24
City	11	2->Lisbon	1	33
Data Center	12		1	34
Data Center Owner	12		1	34
Node Provider ID	12		1	34

You may wish to follow the CO.DELTA known neuron if you found this analysis helpful.

CO.DELTA

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.

[MalithHatananchchige]

Proposal 136574 Review | Malith H - CO.DELTA △

VOTE: YES

TLDR:
The proposal replaces node in subnet x33ed… (application). A claimed by NP they will be undergoing IPv4 and IPv6 change. Vote to adopt

Subnet Details

Property	Value
ID	x33ed…
Type	application
Memory Usage	20.61 GB
Running Canisters	294
Description	N/A

Provider Changes

Removed	Added
Iancu Aurel	Iancu Aurel
Web3game	Mariano Stoll

Location Changes

Removed	Added
Europe, Bucharest	Europe, Bucharest
Asia, HongKong 4	South America, CABA 1

Nodes Removed 2

Node ID	Status	Provider	Data Center	Location
r7few…	DOWN	Iancu Aurel	bu1	Bucharest
dtf67…	UP	Web3game	hk4	HongKong 4

Nodes Added 2

Node ID	Status	Provider	Data Center	Location
cq5nh…	UNASSIGNED	Iancu Aurel	bu1	Bucharest
5resh…	UNASSIGNED	Mariano Stoll	ar1	CABA 1

Passes:

Node r7few…: Health check passed.
Node r7few…: Remove from Subnet check passed.
Node dtf67…: Remove from Subnet check passed.
Node cq5nh…: Replacement Status check passed.
Node 5resh…: Replacement Status check passed.

You may wish to follow the CO.DELTA known neuron if you found this analysis helpful.

CO.DELTA

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.

[LaCosta]

Proposal 136574 – LaCosta | CodeGov

Vote: ADOPT

The proposal replaces a dead node along with a cordoned node on subnet x33ed:

• dead node r7few Dashboard Status: Offline and cordoned node dtf67 Dashboard Status: Active.

with nodes:

• node cq5nh Dashboard Status: Awaiting and node 5resh Dashboard Status: Awaiting.

There is a 10% improvement in area metric since nodes in HongKong were reduced from 2 to 1 with the removal of node dtf67.

As explained in this post and verified by the NP here the cordoned node is being removed in order to redeploy it due to getting new IPv4 and IPv6 ranges.

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 & Neuron’s 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 decentralization 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.

[Webgame]

Hi~ Dear community and official members,

After our efforts in communicating with the network provider, we are able to renew the contract, so there will be no need to change IPv4 and IPv6. I understand this has wasted everyone’s time and effort. We sincerely apologize for this!! So sorry!!

I would like to ask, if we do not make any changes (IPv4/IPv6), is it possible to withdraw the subnet removal request?

Or has the proposal already progressed to the point where it cannot be withdrawn? Do we have to wait for the subnet to be removed first, and then, without making any changes, will the subnet be automatically added back later?

[ZackDS]

Proposal #136574 — Zack | CodeGov

Vote: Adopted

Reason:
The proposal replaces dead Offline status node r7few from Romania with slight improvement to decentralization.
In addition cordoned node dtf67 (freeing up nodes from Web3game in order to update ipv6) is also being replaced.

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 & Neuron’s 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 decentralization 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.

[ZackDS]

@Webgame the proposals are still open. It is up to Dfinity to make a decision. We already voted.

@Webgame

I would like to ask, if we do not make any changes (IPv4/IPv6), is it possible to withdraw the subnet removal request?

@alexu Dfinity could vote to reject them.

[alexu]

Hi @ZackDS ! We could, but since there are no repercussions against the NP, we’ll adopt the vote and then slowly use the freed node pool again to heal the network in the future.