►
From YouTube: Filecoin Plus - Aug 17 Notary Governance Call
Description
Filecoin Plus governance call, in which we discuss recent DataCap allocation trends, application status for direct notary apps and large datasets, and discuss Issue 217 (LDN Process Proposal). Check out this issue in the Notary Governance Repo, and find us on the Filecoin community Slack at fil-plus
The next Notary Governance call will take place August 31st!
A
Great
happy
tuesday
august
17th,
everybody.
This
is
the
five
point
plus
community
governance
call
deep
is
on
a
much
needed
vacation.
I
know
you
guys
are
going
to
be
missing
his
his
shining
face
and
wonderful
opinions.
I'll,
hopefully
be
doing
the
best
that
I
can
to
nc
in
his
stead.
So
we're
going
to
jump
into
this
a
couple
things
on
the
agenda.
It's
a
pretty
typical
flow.
We're
going
to
talk
about
some
quantitative
metrics,
like
we
usually
do
just
kind
of
check
in
on
how
things
are
going.
A
There
is
a
kind
of
process,
ldn
process
change,
issue
number
217
that
deep
and
I
have
been
working
on.
We
posted
that
in
github
feel
free
to
go
check
that
out
and
be
reviewing
that
we're
going
to
cover
the
details
of
it
in
this
call
as
well
and
we'll
have
some
time
for
an
open
forum.
I
also
wanted
to
call
out
if
you
weren't
here
two
weeks
ago,
we've
decided
to
increase
the
cadence
of
these
governance
calls.
A
So
what
that
means
is
that,
two
weeks
from
now
on
august
31st
we're
going
to
do
both
the
8
a.m:
pacific
and
the
4
p.m.
Pacific,
it's
the
same
agenda
for
both
of
those
calls
feel
free
to
come
to
both.
If
you
want
to,
but
the
goal
there
is
to
try
and
get
you
know
the
conversations
happening
faster
because
if
you
can't
normally
make
you
know
the
other
time
of
the
call,
sometimes
you
miss
a
governance
call
for
two
or
four
weeks
at
a
time.
A
It
just
makes
it
a
little
bit
difficult
to
kind
of
have
a
continuity
of
these
conversations,
so
it
can
be
the
same
agenda
for
both
of
those
they'll
still
be
recorded.
Those
recordings
will
be
posted
for
you
to
see.
I
just
want
to
let
everybody
know
we'll
be
increasing
that
cadence.
Hopefully
that
helps
so
jumping
in
stats
from
our
interplanetary
dashboard
from
two
weeks
ago
to
the
current
we're
driving
down
these
times
again
a
couple
hours
a
week.
A
A
couple
specific
things
with
our
direct
notary
activity.
There
are
31
open
issues
in
the
client
on
bordering
onboarding.
12
of
those
look
like
they
are
new
apps,
with
only
one
comment
and
about
19
of
those
appear
to
be
in
review.
This
is
just
based
on
you
know:
do
they
have
more
than
one
comment?
Some
kind
of
dialogue
started
back
and
forth.
A
There
are
138
that
have
been
that
the
labels
for
granted
and
26
of
those
in
the
last
14
days.
So
it's
pretty
exciting.
Last
14
days,
we've
cleared
26,
so
pat
yourselves
on
the
back,
if
you
have
successfully
gotten
some
of
those
direct
notary
applications
across
the
finish
line,
that's
great
and
based
on
this
data,
I've
kind
of
excluded
the
glyph
auto
verifier,
because
it's
sitting
at
384
verified
clients.
So
taking
out
that
outlier,
it
looks
like
we're
hitting
about
five
and
a
half
clients
per
node
rate.
A
So
again,
some
of
these
numbers
are
skewed
a
little
bit
from
sort
of
historical
repeat:
notaries
compared
to
first-time
notaries.
So
that's
an
average
averages
are
always
messy.
Looking
at
the
funnel.
This
is
kind
of
where
we're
sitting
right
now
we
are
going
to
increase
some
of
the
tooling,
which
we'll
talk
about
in
a
second
but
based
on
the
dashboard
that
we
can
see.
Sorry,
we've
got
a
couple
people
jumping
in
the
waiting
room.
A
So
looking
at
how
we're
doing
with
large
data
sets,
it
appears
that
there
is
only
one
brand
new
one
that
was
posted
just
recently
that
doesn't
have
comments
on
it.
Yet
that's
clay
watch
number
29.
in
review.
I
actually
needed
to
change
this.
This
is.
It
should
be
12
because
having
education
issue,
number
20
just
hit
seven,
so
I'll
go
start
that
process
again
just
for
some
transparency,
like
some
of
the
reasons
these
things
take
so
long.
A
The
number
of
steps
that
myself
or
deep
need
to
go
take
as
far
as
like
posting,
some
certain
comments
pushing
it
through
into
the
app
there
is
this
kind
of
still
very
manual
process
to
go
from
now
that
we
have
the
seven
to
actually
getting
it
in
front
of
the
root
key
holders.
Talk
about
that
in
a
second
to
call
out
some
of
those
ones
that
are
in
review.
A
You
can
see
here
some
of
those
open
issues
and
based
on
my
quick
rough
count
this
morning,
where
they
are
sitting
with
a
number
of
notaries
that
are
signed
on
to
them.
So
hopefully
some
of
these
jump
out
to
you
as
ones
that
you've
already
signed
on
to
the
integrity
for
it's
great
or
ones
that
you
don't
recognize,
go
check
them
out,
they're,
all
in
that
github
repo.
A
A
But
there
are
four
that
they're
waiting
on
that
process
so
trying
to
take
that
same
funnel
and
look
at
what's
happening
in
data
cap
overall,
counting
the
large
data
sets,
it
really
skews
the
metrics.
It
makes
it
very
difficult
to
kind
of
parse
out
what
is
happening,
so
this
is
highlighting
that
we
really
need
to
invest
in
some
better
split
out
reporting
so
that
we
can
isolate
the
funnel
for
large
data
sets
compared
to
the
funnel
for
direct
notaries.
A
So
that's
a
thing
that
we
have
kind
of
on
our
on
our
plates
to
figure
out
how
we
want
to
expect
that
and
what
our
scope
of
work
should
be.
But
as
it
stands,
we
still
have
a
lot
more
data
cap
in
notaries
that
has
yet
to
make
declines
again.
Part
of
the
reason
this
is
skewed
is
because,
when
we
create
that
ldn
notary
that
entity
you
know
is
getting
that
significant
first
allocation
of
datacap,
so
it
kind
of
throws
our
numbers.
A
So
to
that
end,
we're
gonna
shift
gears
talk
about
this
process
proposal.
Issue
number
217.
deep
and
I
have
been
kind
of
looking
at
this.
We've
been
talking
to
a
couple
different
people,
both
clients
and
notaries,
people
at
pl
and
people
of
the
foundation-
and
we
want
to
you,
know-
remind
everyone-
the
goal
of
the
film
plus
program.
A
One
of
them,
is
to
reduce
the
friction
of
onboarding
clients
to
the
network,
so
you
know
finding
ways:
incentives
and
mechanisms,
both
through
social
governance
and
through
technical
work,
to
make
this
onboarding
process
faster
and
easier.
Our
time
to
data
caps
for
lpns
is
still
in
the
weeks
or
months
range.
Subsequent
allocations
are
also
booking
blocking
start
blocking
clients.
You
guys
have
seen
this.
You
felt
this
pain,
so
our
main
proposal
in
an
effort
to
decrease
that
time
to
data
cap.
A
This
is
if
we
were
to
really
distill
it
down
to
the
main
changes
we
will
put
all
of
the
existing
active
notaries
on
a
multi-sig.
At
the
time
of
the
application,
there
would
be
a
mechanism
for
notaries
to
opt
out.
I
want
to
make
sure
that's
clear.
There
will
be
a
way
for
donors
to
opt
out,
they'll
kind
of
do
another
issue
and
a
call
where
people
cannot
out
if
they
don't
want
to
be
included
in
this
process.
A
We
talk
about
that,
but
the
goal
then
is
to
create
that
ldn
faster,
because
we
won't
be
waiting
on
seven
notaries
to
do
the
back
and
forth
diligence
on
the
front
end.
We
will
just
create
the
lbn
more
quickly.
We
will
then
decrease
the
threshold
and
include
some
additional
automation
for
specifically
the
allocation
requests.
A
A
That's
right,
2021,
almost
in
the
books,
so
specifically
diving
into
the
details
of
this
again.
All
this
is
on
github
issue
number
217..
I
see
it.
There's
already
been
a
couple
comments
which
are
great,
we'll
kick
off
that
conversation,
but
I
just
want
to
run
through
exactly
what
we're
proposing
client
submits
their
ldn
application.
A
The
governance
team,
plus
a
bot
will
audit
that
application
for
basic
completeness,
which
just
means
did
they
enter.
You
know
something
in
all
these
fields
right
now
we
can
use
thought
to
do
parts
of
that.
To
just
say
you
know
they
didn't
put.
They
didn't
put
a
response
to
this
question,
but
an
amount
of
that
will
still
be
a
governance
team
member
just
because
we
don't
have
a
bot
that
is
going
to.
A
A
We're
making
some
changes
to
root
key
holders
that
are
going
to
increase
their
response
time,
so
we're
adding
some
root
key
holders,
both
at
plm
foundation
and
an
additional
external
root,
key
holder,
so
we'll
be
able
to
prove
those
faster.
So
those
four
that
are
sitting
waiting,
hopefully
by
the
end
of
by
the
end
of
august,
we'll
have
that
in
place.
We've
already
started
that
messaging
to
get
those
repeal,
holder,
changes,
root,
killers
approve
and
then
the
bot
will
initiate
the
request
to
the
lb
and
multisig
for
the
first
allocation.
A
A
The
goal
there
is
that,
when
that
first
allocation
comes
in
the
notaries,
can
then
jump
in
and
perform
the
due
diligence
they
can
review
the
application.
They
can
ask
those
questions
back
and
forth
and
they
can
still
sign
the
proposal
in
the
app
when
we
hit
that
threshold
of
two
they'll
get
their
first
allocation.
A
Should
we
make
subsequent
allocations,
we're
also
proposing
some
additional
automation
here
in
that
subsequent
allocation
process,
specifically
we're
standing
up
at
bot
that
can
monitor
available
data
cap
and
automatically
request
once
they've
hit
a
threshold
of
how
much
they
have
used?
This
is
something
again.
We
can
kind
of
test
and
tweak
to
see
what
percentage
makes
the
most
sense
right
now.
The
proposal
is
that
we
start
at
75,
so
once
they
have
used
75,
the
bot
would
kick
off
another
subsequent
request
and
those
notaries
could
then
perform
more
due
diligence
and
sign
the
subsequent
request.
A
Some
of
the
key
advantages
to
call
out
there
are
fewer
manual
steps,
so
there's
increased
automation
which
can
help
us
scale
over
time
and
there's
increased
automated
auditing.
So
another
piece
that
we're
working
on
is
when
the
bot
kicks
off
this
subsequent
allocation.
We
could
then
go
query.
Our
dashboard
pull
some
basic
stats
to
the
effect
of
how
many
deals
did
they
seal?
A
A
We
can
also
learn
more
for
filecoin
further
down
the
line
as
well.
What
is
working
and
bringing
people
to
the
biz
dev
side
in
file
coin
plus,
what's
working
once
we've
gotten
the
data
cap
into
helping
them
actually
seal
deals
with
storage
providers,
and
it
can
help
the
whole
network
scale
and
learn
more
quickly.
B
Yeah
sure,
can
you
hear
me
wave
if
you
can?
Yes,
excellent?
Okay,
now
now
stop
wait.
So
I
I
I
generally
agree
with
this.
From
from
the
the
work
that
I've
seen,
I
think
it's
important
that
we
kind
of
act
as
a
system
that
lets
people
in
fairly
quickly
and
gets
them
on
on
the
on-ramp
yeah.
My
only
like
micro
concern
is
wondering
whether
we
want
to
drop
the
number
of
notaries
on
the
required
on
the
multisig,
and
my
main
reasons
about
that
was
one.
B
We
we
that
that
doesn't
seem
to
necessarily
be
one
of
the
the
blockers
on
this
and
two
like
two
signatures
is
kind
of
the
minimum
and
I'm
not
sure
that
we
would
be
able
to
get
a
consensus
for
a
process
to
increase
it
right.
I
think
that
we
can
go
down
if
we,
if
it's
still
a
problem,
but
but
it's
going
to
be
hard
to
to
ramp
it
back
up
or
if
we
do
go
down
to
two.
B
Oh
without
hugging
the
meeting,
but
I
remember
my
other
point,
which
is
the
geographical
diversity
again
two
which
well
there's
two
parts
of
this
two
is
again
sort
of
the
minimum.
Do
we
say
that
we've
got
a
b2
from
two
regions
and
secondly,
one
of
the
things
that
I
definitely
hear
is
I'm
getting
a
lot
of
requests
outside
of
my
region
and
having
to
sort
of
oversee
requests
from
outside
my
region,
which
is
fine,
but
I
sort
of
feel
like.
B
B
A
So
yeah,
thank
you.
I
see
two
hands
I'm
going
to
get
to
them,
but
I
wanted
to
because
we
have
been
thinking
about
this.
I
wanted
to
speak
to
the
technical
side
about
the
regional
requirements
it
we
are
technically
able
to
put
in
your
region
for
each
notary
address
and
to
also
effectively
say
you
know
these
regions
need
to
either
not
be
the
same.
A
So
we
need
you
know,
representation
from
different
regions.
It's
a
little
bit
harder
to
force
the
bot
to
require
a
specific
region,
because
then
we
need
to
basically
when
we
create
the
multi-sig.
This
would
be
not
impossible,
but
we
would
need
to
say
this.
This
application
is
coming
from
this
region
so
put
in
you
know
this
country,
this
region
code
and
only
allow
if
one
of
the
epic
notaries
is
from
that.
So
it's
a
little
harder
to
say
we
need
a
region
from
the
application,
it's
easier
to
say.
A
C
Yeah
yeah,
so
for
the
previous
case,
we
have
seen
so
far
like
some
applications
that,
like
it,
requires
miners
for
like
multiple
regions.
Right
so,
and
it
might
like
require
miners
for,
like
europe
and
the
united
states,
so
in
this
kind
of
case
at
least
for
the
like
two
signatures
they
need
to
have,
they
should
have
one
from
united
states
and
one
from
the
the
europe
right,
but
also
maybe
in
the
future.
C
Some
cases
like
require
miners
from
all
over
the
world
and
that
in
that
kind
of
case,
I
do
think
that
it
requires
like
more
than
two
signatures,
because
you
know
for
different
regions,
different
laws
and
like
it
had
like
different
requirements
on
on.
You
know
a
minor.
So
I
I
I
don't
think
it
should
be
like
stick
to
two,
but
it
should
be
like.
According
to
the
I
mean
the
requirement
for
the
miners
and
also
a
source
of
the
I
mean
source
of
the
data
yeah.
I'm
done.
A
A
We
would
want
to
potentially
think
about
changing
both
the
threshold
and
the
geographic
requirement
so
that,
if
they
are,
if
a
client
is
or
if
a
yeah,
if
a
client
is
saying
we're
going
to
make
deals
in
this
region
and
this
region
that
we
should
have
notaries
from
those
two
regions
represented,
is
that
am
I
catching?
What
you're
yeah.
A
C
D
D
A
D
Oh
okay,
so
because
we
don't,
we
do
have
the
ldn
dashboard.
Actually
we
we
have
done
this
manually
so
right
now
we
have
two
to
22
ldn.
That's
total
request
for
50
pbs
right.
So
for
us
as
a
notary.
So
we
would
like
to
support
some
project
and
we
said
we
would
like
to
support
the
project
and
we
have
the
market
sign,
but
actually
that's
too
complicated
for
us,
because
there
was
so
many
projects.
Maybe
we
will
miss
it.
D
Some
we
rise
our
hand
said
I
will
support
this
project
and
then
but
too
many
emails
coming
and
we
cannot
find
out
which
project
we
find.
We
have
supported
so
right
now
I
have
done
these
sheets,
it's
so
everybody
can
share.
I
can
see
all
the
projects
here
and
someone
got
seven
notaries
and
someone
got
two
or
maybe
five
but
someone
they
don't
have
people
to
support.
D
A
A
You
know
the
the
notification,
the
discussion
tracking
so
that
you
could
more
easily
see
yeah
so
that
it's
less
manual,
you
know
when
an
application
comes
in
we'd,
be
able
to
do
more
automation
on
you,
know,
labeling
and
notifying.
You
know,
notaries
that
it
was
in
when
comments
got
made.
We
could
put
you
know
we
could.
We
could
build
a
lot
more
robust,
tooling,
by
kind
of
decoupling
from
github.
A
A
So
it's
very
hard
for
you
to
say
well,
someone
else
will
do
it
I'll,
just
like
sign
a
message,
so
that
was
that
was
one
of
the
kind
of
the
ideas
going
into
the
number
being
two
faye
has
a
question
in
the
chat
for
for
a
couple
people
about
confirming
address.
I
think
that
I'm
not
sure
that
we
need
people
to
confirm
their
address.
I
think
that
that
is
this,
for
which
ldn
is
this.
A
A
A
So
that's
part
of
why
we
are
trying
to
add
some
different
root,
key
holders
that
are
more
directly
involved
and
engaged
in
the
program
as
it
is
the
we
currently
only
have
three
route
keyholders
with
a
threshold
of
two
and
two
of
those
route.
Key
holders
are
outside
of
our
organizations,
so
it
makes
it
challenging
to
get
messages
signed.
So,
yes,
it
is
a.
It
is
a
blocker
and
it
is
hopefully
we
have.
The
proposals
have
been
sent
as
of
yesterday.
A
A
A
A
So
it
may
be
that
before
that,
get
to
this
point
that
are
awaiting
route
keyholders
would
follow
this
existing
process
of
having
seven
notaries
on
the
multi-sig
and
a
threshold
of
four.
We
could
discuss
that.
It
would
probably
be
that
if
we
were
to,
you
know,
implement
this
in
time,
it
would
be
applications
that
have
not
yet
had
an
ldn
notary
created.
A
A
A
A
E
A
I
think
that
when
we
get
it
completed
and
finalized,
we'll
post
it
in
probably
posted
in
slack
and
also
in
the
notary
governance,
maybe
as
an
issue
again,
this
is
kind
of
where
the
some
of
those
conversations
can
be
a
little
tricky,
but
yes,
we're
getting
api's
available
for
those
we're
currently
testing
them
with
the
fill
plus
app
team
kiko
so
that
they
can
pull
this
information
and
make
those
audits
like
I
was
talking
about
earlier.
Those
automated
audit
snapshot
comments
so
we're
using
that
as
a
mechanism
to
test
those
apis
so
stay
tuned.
A
B
B
One
of
the
things
that
is
a
little
hard
to
establish
is
the
only
contact
details
we
have
are
the
github
account
and
the
vast
majority
of
the
applications
that
I've
seen.
There's
no
history
to
the
github
account
there
are.
There
is
there's
very
little
public
details.
I
wonder
if
we
should
include
a
contact
email
address
in
that
first
form
I
mean
we
would
accept.
We'd
have
to
up
we'd
have
to
obfuscate
it.
Wouldn't
we
because
it
would
be
public.
Maybe
I've
answered
my
own
question
anyway.
B
It
just
means
that
the
manual
step
that
I've
had
to
do
is
to
say
to
someone.
Do
you
have
a
contact
address
at
that
at
that
particular
service,
because
I
think
sometimes
people
are
applying
on
behalf
of
a
large
company
when
they
haven't
yet
necessarily
sort
of
got
permission
they're
doing
it
kind
of
in
anticipation
of
sorting
out
a
deal
with
that
that
that
website
or
company.
A
A
A
A
A
I
want
to
jump
back
then
to
call
your
attention
to
some
of
these
other
lbns
that
are
in
review
if
you
wanted
to
take
some
time
to
check
out
some
of
these
we've
heard
from
some
of
these
clients
on
calls
before
and
our
hope
is
to
get
some
more
clients
in
the
future
to
come
to.
These
notary
calls
additionally.
A
There
are,
as
you
said,
there's
like
12
new
applications.
Some
of
those
might
be
sitting
with
you
and
the
you
know:
notification
processing
github
is
not
the
best.
So
if
you
want
to
take
a
chance,
go
check
out
if
you
have
any
sitting
and
waiting
or
if
there
are
any
comments
that
you
know
might
need
to
be
prodded
through
and
then
the
last
kind
of
thing
to
call
out
that
the
next
time
we
have
this
call
on
august
31st.
A
It
will
happen.
Then,
two
time
slots,
we're
gonna
update
the
google
community
calendar
to
reflect
back
and
again
it
should
be
the
same
agenda
for
both
of
those
time
slots.
The
discussion
might
be
different
based
on
who's.
You
know
in
the
room,
but
they'll
be
recorded
and
saved,
and
you
can
go
back
and
watch
both
or
one
of
the
meetings.