Modification: DataCap Removal Request

[simonkim0515]

Issue Description

(Updated Workaround)
With the growth of the Filecoin Plus program there has been an influx of applications. With more applications there have been more cases of inactivity from verified clients or abuse of the Filecoin Plus system incentives

Impact

Reduce the amount of abuse within the program and to lower the amount of inactive applications

Proposed Solution(s)

To make sure Filecoin Plus will progress forward and identify any applications that do not follow Filecoin Plus best practices, the governance team, in collaboration with the T&T WG, proposes using two new notary addresses - one as a proposer and the other as an approver. With these two new notaries, they will be able to remove DataCap as the same as how notaries can provide DataCap.

Reasons to remove DataCap:

• Client requested to another wallet

• Accidental duplicate

• Providing false information

(Will be adding the full list of GH handles that can raise these issues)

Detailed process:

All requests for DataCap removal will be processed through individual issues in the notary-governance repository. The governance team or a proposing notary will fill out a template that includes relevant information such as the client's application URL, client name, client address, and the amount of DataCap to be removed. Once the issue is live, notaries will have the opportunity to provide their input by commenting on the proposal. Following a two-week period of discussion and careful consideration of all comments, if there is consensus or majority support (by a margin of at least two notaries) to remove DataCap from the client address, the T&T WG or the governance team will take action to remove DataCap. Specifically, this means:

• The DataCap removal Proposal notary will sign a message confirming the client address and bytes to be removed and share the bytes in the Issue using lotus filplus sign-remove-data-cap-proposal

• The DataCap removal Approver notary will sign a message confirming the client address and bytes to be removed and share the bytes in the Issue using lotus filplus sign-remove-data-cap-proposal

• This will then be executed on chain via the RKH:

1. Proposal using ./lotus-shed verifreg remove-verified-client-data-cap or manually
2. Approval using msig approve

Timeline

Technical dependencies

End of POC checkpoint (if applicable)

Risks and mitigations

Related Issues

https://github.com/filecoin-project/FIPs/blob/master/FIPS/fip-0028.md

[large-datacap-requests]

Thanks for your request!
❗ We have found some problems in the information provided.
We could not find your Name in the information provided
We could not find your Filecoin address in the information provided
We could not find the Datacap requested in the information provided
We could not find any Web site or social media info in the information provided
We could not find any Expected weekly DataCap usage rate in the information provided
We could not find any Region in the information provided

Please, take a look at the request and edit the body of the issue providing all the required information.

[liyunzhi-666]

When a client is found to be cheating by the community, is the used DataCap removed or is the remaining DataCap in the application removed?

[stcloudlisa]

It is the SP and the client who are dishonest, not the notary. Deleting the bad DC is the most effective way.

[herrehesse]

@simonkim0515 - Full support

Next step will be the removal of datacap from storage providers which was obtained by abusive behaviour.

[salstorage]

Why would 'No activity for more than 6-8 weeks' be a concern for the network.
In other words, no activity for a certain amount of time does not necessarily mean DC abuse.
Sal, Seal Storage Technology.

[Joss-Hua]

Whether all LDN numbers that trigger "Reasons" will be disclosed here？

[herrehesse]

@salstorage The presence of numerous inactive proposals can cause confusion and hinder a thorough review of active proposals. Applicants are typically given the opportunity to revise their proposal or answer any questions before the proposal is closed.

[flyworker]

i agree with all those terms.
Inactive notaries does not perform their duties, should be removed.

[alchemypunk]

Has this FIP not been passed yet? I think it can be passed as soon as possible.

[simonkim0515]

@liyunzhi-666 the DataCap that was allocated to the client would be removed and the issue would be closed to prevent any future allocation regarding that issue.

[simonkim0515]

@0xXPunkX Yes, the FIP has been passed
https://github.com/filecoin-project/FIPs/blob/master/FIPS/fip-0028.md

[raghavrmadya]

I would like to propose that we close this issue by EOD if there is no further discussion on this. As T&T Lead, I'm excited about this and look forward to leverage this to address collusion b/w stakeholders in the Fil+ program

[dkkapur]

@simonkim0515 - just want to ask, would we auto close the applications as well once the datacap removal goes through on a stale application?

[Kevin-FF-USA]

For the discussion coversation that look place on the last Governance call, here is the recording: https://youtu.be/B8uSpbi_xIU?t=735

[simonkim0515]

Want to propose new workoaround.

The current version of the Ledger Filecoin app does not currently support the ability to sign messages that do not end up on chain. Since all of our notaries operate primarily using Ledger based addresses, this blocks us from building out the DataCap removal flow. As a temporary solution, the governance team, in collaboration with the T&T WG, proposes using two new notary addresses - one as a proposer and the other as an approver. Each notary would be allocated 1 byte of DataCap on-chain to receive the “verifier” status. These notaries will be used to act on behalf of actual notaries, but able to produce the signed bytes required to actually modify/remove DataCap balances from client addresses on chain. The intent is to use this as a temporary solution in the near term to remove remaining balance of DataCap held by clients in cases where there is support from notaries/the T&T WG. These notaries will be as follows:

• DataCap removal Proposer: f1/f3 address on chain operated by T&T WG, private key with RG

• Address: f1fpaa5nemr4xxgcxkanh5dizozaqmljquujyfnmi

• DataCap removal Approver: f1/f3 address on chain operated by governance team, private key with Simon Kim

• Address: f1xqc6b7dcm3iksnvkf3tlakklr2atxrvulfpha7i

All requests for DataCap removal will be processed through individual issues in the notary-governance repository. The governance team or a proposing notary will fill out a template that includes relevant information such as the client's application URL, client name, client address, and the amount of DataCap to be removed. Once the issue is live, notaries will have the opportunity to provide their input by commenting on the proposal. Following a two-week period of discussion and careful consideration of all comments, if there is consensus or majority support (by a margin of at least two notaries) to remove DataCap from the client address, the T&T WG or the governance team will take action to remove DataCap. Specifically, this means:

• The DataCap removal Proposal notary will sign a message confirming the client address and bytes to be removed and share the bytes in the Issue using lotus filplus sign-remove-data-cap-proposal

• The DataCap removal Approver notary will sign a message confirming the client address and bytes to be removed and share the bytes in the Issue using lotus filplus sign-remove-data-cap-proposal

• This will then be executed on chain via the RKH:

1. Proposal using ./lotus-shed verifreg remove-verified-client-data-cap or manually
2. Approval using msig approve

Once the dependency is delivered in the Ledger Filecoin App, we propose removing these two temporary notaries and will work towards an actual flow using tooling as with other notary/RKH flows in GitHub. This enables us to make forward progress in the “Quality Phase” for Fil+ and unblock actioning this type of consequence in a transparent way while waiting for additional development in the ecosystem.

[beck-8]

When a client is found to be cheating by the community, is the used DataCap removed or is the remaining DataCap in the application removed?

Currently technically only the remaining datacap can be deleted

[simonkim0515]

This proposal is considered to be accepted following the principles of optimistic governance seeing no active pushback from the community