This topic is intended to capture Subnet Management activities over time for the yinp6 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 an NNS proposal today to reduce the notarization delay on the subnet, yinp6, similar to what has happened on other subnets in recent weeks (you can find all details in this forum thread).
Voted to adopt proposal 134190, as the reasoning is sound and the description matches the payload. This proposal replaces 1 healthy node, which appears as “Active” on the IC dashboard. The proposed change improves decentralisation with respect to country and brings the target topology not quite within the requirements (as 2 countries still have 3 nodes each) but closer than before.
TLDR: I’m planning to adopt. Improves formal IC Target Topology metrics for this subnets, by reducing the maximum number of nodes that reside in the same country. This subnet will still be in violation of the formal IC Target Topology after this proposal, but it will be closer to achieving it.
Motivation:
replacing node rb35i-iw6yi-h4gle-oyhqk-ce3o2-bqrnx-34ddb-i3npb-2wdrv-o2sib-vqe to optimize network topology
1 removed US node replaced with a node in Canada.
Decentralisation Stats
Subnet node distance stats (distance between any 2 nodes in the subnet) →
Smallest Distance
Average Distance
Largest Distance
EXISTING
0 km
6248.367 km
16464.988 km
PROPOSED
0 km (NaN%)
6087.179 km (-2.6%)
15986.483 km (-2.9%)
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
3
8
13
13
13
13
PROPOSED
3
9 (+11.1%)
13
13
13
13
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.) →
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)
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.
Another good neuron to follow is 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)
Voted to adopt proposal 134190. The proposal replaces two nodes from subnet yinp6:
Removed Nodes: rb35i.
Added Nodes: e72ys.
The proposal was verified using the DRE tool to verify the metrics stated. All nodes replaced are healthy but this replacements improve the network topology on the country metric by reducing the number of nodes in the US from 4 to 3.
TLDR: This is a great proposal, I’ll vote to adopt. This subnet is currently in violation of the IC Target Topology (3 nodes in one country). Once this proposal executes there will be no more than 2 nodes per country. See ‘Decentralisation Stats’ and the map below for more info.
Motivation:
replacing node s52il-lowsg-eip4y-pt5lv-sbdpb-vg4gg-4iasu-egajp-yluji-znfz3-2qe to optimize network topology
replacing node cjiry-m7wev-s6adg-3oqev-2g74r-wmtlj-ttdbj-abwts-rtwlj-6lxts-dqe to optimize network topology
2 removed nodes in Switzerland and the US replaced with 2 nodes in Poland and South Africa.
Decentralisation Stats
Subnet node distance stats (distance between any 2 nodes in the subnet) →
Smallest Distance
Average Distance
Largest Distance
EXISTING
0 km
6087.179 km
15986.483 km
PROPOSED
95.554 km (+∞%)
6375.803 km (+4.7%)
15986.483 km
This proposal 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
3
9
13
13
13
13
PROPOSED
4 (+25%)
11 (+18.2%)
13
13
13
13
This proposal improves decentralisation in terms of jurisdiction diversity.
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)
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.
Another good neuron to follow is 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)
This proposal replaces 2 nodes, both of which appear in the dashboard as “Status: Active”, for the purpose of improving network topology. As shown in the proposal and verified using the DRE tool, decentralisation parameters are improved with respect to country and brought to within the requirements of the target topology.
Voted to adopt proposal 134260. The proposal replaces two nodes from subnet yinp6:
Removed Nodes: s52il, cjiry.
Added Nodes: mswad and ulcre.
The proposal was verified using the DRE tool to verify the metrics stated. Both nodes removed are healthy and the replacement was proposed to improve the Nakamoto Coefficients in the area (reduced number of nodes in Zurich from 2 to 1) and country (reduced number of nodes in the US and China from 3 to 2) metrics.
This proposal replaces node bi6er which appears in the dashboard as “Status: Active”, for the purpose of examining the stability of another node operator’s nodes. As shown in the proposal, decentralisation parameters are unchanged and remain within the requirements of the target topology.
I’ve vote to adopt proposal 134402. The decentralisation coefficients were unchanged by the proposal. As can be observed using the IC-API, the nj365 node operator has 14 nodes (as stated in the proposal summary). Now that this proposal has executed, one of those nodes is assigned (wwdbq).
Note that the IC-API is not open source. Since learning this, I’m in the process of switching over verifiable sources of this sort of information (rejecting because I’ve not had time to do this yet would be too harsh - even for me ).
The proposal replaces one node from subnet yinp6:
Removed Node: bi6er
Added Node: 6f7g4
The proposal was verified using the DRE tool to verify the metrics stated. The NP that controlls the node removed as at least one node active and isn’t affected by this replacement.
Voted to reject proposal 134582 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.
).