Data should include: validating session, node id, geolocation data, data center provider name (if applicable).
I am even do not know what is this: validating session, node id
you mean adnl address, but it change every validation cicle, and i do not any reason to store this information.
Data should include: validating session, node id, geolocation data, data center provider name (if applicable).
The user can switch validating sessions.
I think this may be a plus for the jury, but not in the requirements.
For history, for analysis, for verification.
It seems to me better to make a full-fledged product right away than to patch holes later.
Could you explain what is this, or give any links on documentation.
Since last week some people showed interest for this contest, now it, in accordance with the appointment, has been submitted for discussion to the DevOps SubGovernance.
I hope it will be discussed and approved in the near future.
This contest is planned to be launched through A&S Subgov on this week.
Dmitry and everyone, if you have a desire to take part in its launch, then welcome https://t.me/freeton_analytics
It is technically difficult contest. DevOps Subgov is more appropriate for this, i think in A&S Subgov is not exist jury with sufficient skills for similar contests.
The competition is good, but it should be assumed that in the future governments may begin to ban cryptocurrencies, as they already do in Russia and many other countries, so any initiatives to track the exact location of the server are disastrous, validators should have the right to anonymity
On the other hand, you can draw a map by ip, + the names of validators, where each validator, at its discretion, can leave any text and it will be shown on the map.
map by ip, + the names of validators
Actually we can’t - i do not know the way to bind ip address and validator name (exist way to get it, but it work only if you validation node owner, and do not work for foreign adnl addresess), i do not know why another man add this point in his requirements!
validators should have the right to anonymity
I agree and, as i understand from documentation, system of adnl addresses was implemented also to hide ip information from other.
I know only one way to fetch geo ip information - is parse traffic data.
This information available for other network parcipant and for provider. That is mean, that we can use common information, that already public as fact, but with more useful visualization.
For me this chat is forbidden for send messages
What is the status of this propose in A&S Subgov?
Edited version from aestlist with new, strange requirements prepared for A&S Subgov?
This is apparently his vision of this competition.
So far there is only this document. In which anyone can leave their comments.
in which chat are you prohibited from sending messages?
Welcome: https://t.me/freeton_analytics
P.S.
A couple of months ago, in our personal correspondence, you said that you no longer want to support this contest.
I’m glad to see that you changed your mind and returned to discussing it!
Early it was not possible, but now i also see all this information.
Now all become simple.
And? Which version of the contest’s spec do you prefer now?
On this moment i do know possible or not this requirements (even theoreticaly), but all looks good.
I think, that data center provider name is addition options and must not be in requirements.
Ok, I’ll try to explain my thoughts in more detail.
The solution should collect data from the moment it was launched.
The validating session that was at the time of its start will be the first. Then the second, third, etc.
Adnl address + validation session timeframe define the validator. He can find himself in this. He can give feedback on whether his coordinates were determined correctly or not. In other words, it gives complete certainty (which I think is very important).
And I think it’s completely wrong to make a solution with coordinates but without names of data centers. These two parameters complement each other perfectly. They give twice as much information at once.
To do a separate competition for data centers is a waste of crystals. Why not combine?
About validation session: I still cant find information about validation session, are you sure that this information available for everyone. Aspecialy information about other validators, that working right now? Only if you sure, that it is available for other contest parcipants, we can add it to requirements.
About datacenter name: For geolocation exist special open sources databases, (GeoLite2). i never mat such database for data center info. You propose use external service, is it free? It is has any license limitation (for example for commercial use)? Or exist open source database, that available for everyone?
It`s not good to show real locations of nodes.
This information must be anonymous.
Hi all! DevOps subgov just passed voting process in Main Governance. We will happy to assist with judying of this contest.
I support the idea of this contest! based on past experience, we need it!
This contest is really needed. Its results will help to avoid problems in the future. I support.