Closed xinaxu closed 2 years ago
Thanks for your request! Everything looks good. :ok_hand:
A Governance Team member will review the information provided and contact you back pretty soon.
@xinaxu Can you clarify the difference between this application and #182 ? Are they both for Slingshot competition?
@galen-mcandrew That's correct. They are both for Slingshot competition, however for different dataset. Per Slingshot rule, each project needs to have different client address to differentiate.
Cool idea! Just wanted to point out the similarities here between this application and the Glif chainstate preservation project application.
There are a couple key differences though:
Thanks @Schwartz10 for pointing out the difference
@galen-mcandrew Could you take a look at this one? Is there any concern? Anything I can do to fascilitate the grant?
1PiB
Expected weekly DataCap usage rate
200TiB
**Multisig created and sent to RKH f01726223
f01726223
f1quvbybolurp6d4xzthieupygtco6mcakwflzwya
51.19999999999982TiB
Your Datacap Allocation Request has been proposed by the Notary
bafy2bzacebxooklpg3a5obe5x2qewb6l4qswfk7drgnv7ylmxq3fxnfl4vzn6
Address
f1quvbybolurp6d4xzthieupygtco6mcakwflzwya
Datacap Allocated
51.20TiB
Signer Address
f1oz43ckvmtxmmsfzqm6bpnemqlavz4ifyl524chq
You can check the status of the message here: https://filfox.info/en/message/bafy2bzacebxooklpg3a5obe5x2qewb6l4qswfk7drgnv7ylmxq3fxnfl4vzn6
Your Datacap Allocation Request has been approved by the Notary
bafy2bzacebseblx3snbarjpsdc23bsyub4swwfjxgjdeqc4pdop2cdvnjunai
Address
f1quvbybolurp6d4xzthieupygtco6mcakwflzwya
Datacap Allocated
51.20TiB
Signer Address
f1ystxl2ootvpirpa7ebgwl7vlhwkbx2r4zjxwe5i
You can check the status of the message here: https://filfox.info/en/message/bafy2bzacebseblx3snbarjpsdc23bsyub4swwfjxgjdeqc4pdop2cdvnjunai
Your Datacap Allocation Request has been approved by the Notary
bafy2bzacebyyl2vk4skelxhinuq6hjsdsibqsbiiorowrseidibnijt6vgh22
Address
f1quvbybolurp6d4xzthieupygtco6mcakwflzwya
Datacap Allocated
51.20TiB
Signer Address
f1fkxkfxgopjf3ufnfg5i3m6qlwf73kp4w5zz7nnq
You can check the status of the message here: https://filfox.info/en/message/bafy2bzacebyyl2vk4skelxhinuq6hjsdsibqsbiiorowrseidibnijt6vgh22
f01726223
f1quvbybolurp6d4xzthieupygtco6mcakwflzwya
102.39999999999964TiB
f01726223
f1quvbybolurp6d4xzthieupygtco6mcakwflzwya
not found & not found
10% of total dc amount requested
102.39999999999964TiB
102.39999999999964TiB
921.6000000000004TiB
Number of deals | Number of storage providers | Previous DC Allocated | Top provider | Remaining DC |
---|---|---|---|---|
0 | 0 | 51.19999999999982TiB | 0 | 9.599999999627471GiB |
Your Datacap Allocation Request has been proposed by the Notary
bafy2bzacectqphzaf7n4mt2to67cgq3klc7uaaei5bjjkha6lgificknpz6f4
Address
f1quvbybolurp6d4xzthieupygtco6mcakwflzwya
Datacap Allocated
102.40TiB
Signer Address
f1oz43ckvmtxmmsfzqm6bpnemqlavz4ifyl524chq
You can check the status of the message here: https://filfox.info/en/message/bafy2bzacectqphzaf7n4mt2to67cgq3klc7uaaei5bjjkha6lgificknpz6f4
Your Datacap Allocation Request has been approved by the Notary
bafy2bzacebwzi5mjdkav6247opqjhid5q53s3xc24zu3eyco6aahpvpw5ckdk
Address
f1quvbybolurp6d4xzthieupygtco6mcakwflzwya
Datacap Allocated
102.40TiB
Signer Address
f1k6wwevxvp466ybil7y2scqlhtnrz5atjkkyvm4a
You can check the status of the message here: https://filfox.info/en/message/bafy2bzacebwzi5mjdkav6247opqjhid5q53s3xc24zu3eyco6aahpvpw5ckdk
f01726223
f1quvbybolurp6d4xzthieupygtco6mcakwflzwya
204.79999999999927TiB
f01726223
f1quvbybolurp6d4xzthieupygtco6mcakwflzwya
not found & not found
20% of total dc amount requested
204.79999999999927TiB
204.79999999999927TiB
819.2000000000007TiB
Number of deals | Number of storage providers | Previous DC Allocated | Top provider | Remaining DC |
---|---|---|---|---|
0 | 0 | 102.39999999999964TiB | 0 | 3.199999999254942GiB |
Your Datacap Allocation Request has been proposed by the Notary
bafy2bzacedx2axr6nwnaz3rmaila5wklfyuroh3n4tcxm4fjqhpaqhnbc5i64
Address
f1quvbybolurp6d4xzthieupygtco6mcakwflzwya
Datacap Allocated
204.80TiB
Signer Address
f1hlubjsdkv4wmsdadihloxgwrz3j3ernf6i3cbpy
You can check the status of the message here: https://filfox.info/en/message/bafy2bzacedx2axr6nwnaz3rmaila5wklfyuroh3n4tcxm4fjqhpaqhnbc5i64
Your Datacap Allocation Request has been approved by the Notary
bafy2bzacebyaqfxra4qsfu3qu3u4ea7nxib4sl3j6fwpeum4ijlziuyauvbza
Address
f1quvbybolurp6d4xzthieupygtco6mcakwflzwya
Datacap Allocated
204.80TiB
Signer Address
f1krmypm4uoxxf3g7okrwtrahlmpcph3y7rbqqgfa
You can check the status of the message here: https://filfox.info/en/message/bafy2bzacebyaqfxra4qsfu3qu3u4ea7nxib4sl3j6fwpeum4ijlziuyauvbza
f01726223
f1quvbybolurp6d4xzthieupygtco6mcakwflzwya
409.59TiB
f01726223
f1quvbybolurp6d4xzthieupygtco6mcakwflzwya
not found & not found
40% of total dc amount requested
409.59TiB
409.59TiB
614.40TiB
Number of deals | Number of storage providers | Previous DC Allocated | Top provider | Remaining DC |
---|---|---|---|---|
0 | 0 | 204.79999999999927TiB | 0 | 24.74TiB |
Current datacap allocation statistics: | Storage Provider | Number of deals |
---|---|---|
f01345523 | 1268 | |
f01392893 | 4816 | |
f01611097 | 526 | |
f01652333 | 1093 | |
f01702940 | 1095 | |
f01732189 | 3121 |
Your Datacap Allocation Request has been proposed by the Notary
bafy2bzacedjdn2hinfgrmht22w3z2sehy4vsilt2hcadiyfz2ots45qmtslta
Address
f1quvbybolurp6d4xzthieupygtco6mcakwflzwya
Datacap Allocated
409.59TiB
Signer Address
f1hlubjsdkv4wmsdadihloxgwrz3j3ernf6i3cbpy
You can check the status of the message here: https://filfox.info/en/message/bafy2bzacedjdn2hinfgrmht22w3z2sehy4vsilt2hcadiyfz2ots45qmtslta
Your Datacap Allocation Request has been approved by the Notary
bafy2bzacebhvoqjjemgcgchacls65zpiu4kbcm5mzuwb6zhncey6mawijcpa4
Address
f1quvbybolurp6d4xzthieupygtco6mcakwflzwya
Datacap Allocated
409.59TiB
Signer Address
f1yqydpmqb5en262jpottko2kd65msajax7fi4rmq
You can check the status of the message here: https://filfox.info/en/message/bafy2bzacebhvoqjjemgcgchacls65zpiu4kbcm5mzuwb6zhncey6mawijcpa4
f01726223
f1quvbybolurp6d4xzthieupygtco6mcakwflzwya
204.81TiB
f01726223
f1quvbybolurp6d4xzthieupygtco6mcakwflzwya
not found & not found
80% of total dc amount requested
204.81TiB
819.18TiB
204.81TiB
Number of deals | Number of storage providers | Previous DC Allocated | Top provider | Remaining DC |
---|---|---|---|---|
25125 | 11 | 409.59TiB | 25.25 | 58.73TiB |
@MegTei wonder if you can help approve this last round?
Your Datacap Allocation Request has been proposed by the Notary
bafy2bzaceb2bpjejhlbhwemwzhb5u3axs3pqwyh7qrdiqhfgqqzw7enievrvy
Address
f1quvbybolurp6d4xzthieupygtco6mcakwflzwya
Datacap Allocated
204.81TiB
Signer Address
f1ystxl2ootvpirpa7ebgwl7vlhwkbx2r4zjxwe5i
You can check the status of the message here: https://filfox.info/en/message/bafy2bzaceb2bpjejhlbhwemwzhb5u3axs3pqwyh7qrdiqhfgqqzw7enievrvy
Your Datacap Allocation Request has been approved by the Notary
bafy2bzacedp3wrhtfppb3xysbva6uctm5wbzzovrl2diy7yhsxy7zqyzbdlmm
Address
f1quvbybolurp6d4xzthieupygtco6mcakwflzwya
Datacap Allocated
204.81TiB
Signer Address
f1hlubjsdkv4wmsdadihloxgwrz3j3ernf6i3cbpy
You can check the status of the message here: https://filfox.info/en/message/bafy2bzacedp3wrhtfppb3xysbva6uctm5wbzzovrl2diy7yhsxy7zqyzbdlmm
f01726223
f1quvbybolurp6d4xzthieupygtco6mcakwflzwya
3B
f01726223
f1quvbybolurp6d4xzthieupygtco6mcakwflzwya
not found & not found
80% of total dc amount requested
3B
0.0YiB
3B
Number of deals | Number of storage providers | Previous DC Allocated | Top provider | Remaining DC |
---|---|---|---|---|
34017 | 12 | 204.81TiB | 21.60 | 49.49TiB |
Your Datacap Allocation Request has been proposed by the Notary
bafy2bzacebbu54724zil5fcep6wmcnugpn6ykjzsxbh6pxrimsur2u7l37m5w
Address
f1quvbybolurp6d4xzthieupygtco6mcakwflzwya
Datacap Allocated
3.00B
Signer Address
f1krmypm4uoxxf3g7okrwtrahlmpcph3y7rbqqgfa
You can check the status of the message here: https://filfox.info/en/message/bafy2bzacebbu54724zil5fcep6wmcnugpn6ykjzsxbh6pxrimsur2u7l37m5w
TechGreedy
f1quvbybolurp6d4xzthieupygtco6mcakwflzwya
The below table shows the distribution of storage providers that have stored data for this client.
If this is the first time a provider takes verified deal, it will be marked as new
.
For most of the datacap application, below restrictions should apply.
✔️ Storage provider distribution looks healthy.
Provider | Location | Total Deals Sealed | Percentage | Unique Data | Duplicate Deals |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
f01652333 | Sunnyvale, California, US | 181.56 TiB | 17.81% | 177.22 TiB | 2.39% |
f01732189 | San Diego, California, US | 174.97 TiB | 17.17% | 174.97 TiB | 0.00% |
f01392893 | Amsterdam, North Holland, NL | 173.34 TiB | 17.01% | 173.34 TiB | 0.00% |
f01702940 | Dallas, Texas, US | 131.39 TiB | 12.89% | 130.02 TiB | 1.05% |
f01345523 | Antwerpen, Flanders, BE | 100.23 TiB | 9.83% | 100.20 TiB | 0.03% |
f01752548 | Seattle, Washington, US | 62.98 TiB | 6.18% | 62.33 TiB | 1.04% |
f01794835 | Chengdu, Sichuan, CN | 54.70 TiB | 5.37% | 47.39 TiB | 13.37% |
f01823264 | Chengdu, Sichuan, CN | 54.16 TiB | 5.31% | 52.84 TiB | 2.42% |
f01775922 | Ashburn, Virginia, US | 35.72 TiB | 3.50% | 35.72 TiB | 0.00% |
f01611097 | San Clemente, California, US | 27.00 TiB | 2.65% | 27.00 TiB | 0.00% |
f039940 | Chengdu, Sichuan, CN | 21.53 TiB | 2.11% | 21.03 TiB | 2.32% |
f01732188 | Chicago, Illinois, US | 1.44 TiB | 0.14% | 1.44 TiB | 0.00% |
f034258 | Chengdu, Sichuan, CN | 224.00 GiB | 0.02% | 224.00 GiB | 0.00% |
The below table shows how each many unique data are replicated across storage providers.
✔️ Data replication looks healthy.
Unique Data Size | Total Deals Made | Number of Providers | Deal Percentage |
---|---|---|---|
16.00 GiB | 16.00 GiB | 1 | 0.00% |
528.00 GiB | 1.03 TiB | 2 | 0.10% |
30.34 TiB | 91.16 TiB | 3 | 8.94% |
24.22 TiB | 97.69 TiB | 4 | 9.58% |
20.67 TiB | 103.80 TiB | 5 | 10.18% |
39.75 TiB | 240.13 TiB | 6 | 23.56% |
40.94 TiB | 293.38 TiB | 7 | 28.78% |
12.66 TiB | 103.50 TiB | 8 | 10.15% |
5.84 TiB | 53.53 TiB | 9 | 5.25% |
3.25 TiB | 35.03 TiB | 10 | 3.44% |
The below table shows how many unique data are shared with other clients. Usually different applications owns different data and should not resolve to the same CID.
⚠️ CID sharing has been observed.
Other Client | Application | Total Deals Affected | Unique CIDs | Verifier |
---|---|---|---|---|
f1pkrmygbvweykpjcut36lf7ewgqdfhjklbhvepda | Protocol Labs ( project: Slingshot Evergreen ) | 142.33 TiB | 1,522 | LDN # 293 |
[^1]: To manually trigger this report, add a comment with text checker:manualTrigger
TechGreedy
f1quvbybolurp6d4xzthieupygtco6mcakwflzwya
The below table shows the distribution of storage providers that have stored data for this client.
If this is the first time a provider takes verified deal, it will be marked as new
.
For most of the datacap application, below restrictions should apply.
✔️ Storage provider distribution looks healthy.
Provider | Location | Total Deals Sealed | Percentage | Unique Data | Duplicate Deals |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
f01652333 | Sunnyvale, California, US | 181.56 TiB | 17.81% | 177.22 TiB | 2.39% |
f01732189 | San Diego, California, US | 174.97 TiB | 17.17% | 174.97 TiB | 0.00% |
f01392893 | Amsterdam, North Holland, NL | 173.34 TiB | 17.01% | 173.34 TiB | 0.00% |
f01702940 | Dallas, Texas, US | 131.39 TiB | 12.89% | 130.02 TiB | 1.05% |
f01345523 | Antwerpen, Flanders, BE | 100.23 TiB | 9.83% | 100.20 TiB | 0.03% |
f01752548 | Seattle, Washington, US | 62.98 TiB | 6.18% | 62.33 TiB | 1.04% |
f01794835 | Chengdu, Sichuan, CN | 54.70 TiB | 5.37% | 47.39 TiB | 13.37% |
f01823264 | Chengdu, Sichuan, CN | 54.16 TiB | 5.31% | 52.84 TiB | 2.42% |
f01775922 | Ashburn, Virginia, US | 35.72 TiB | 3.50% | 35.72 TiB | 0.00% |
f01611097 | San Clemente, California, US | 27.00 TiB | 2.65% | 27.00 TiB | 0.00% |
f039940 | Chengdu, Sichuan, CN | 21.53 TiB | 2.11% | 21.03 TiB | 2.32% |
f01732188 | Chicago, Illinois, US | 1.44 TiB | 0.14% | 1.44 TiB | 0.00% |
f034258 | Chengdu, Sichuan, CN | 224.00 GiB | 0.02% | 224.00 GiB | 0.00% |
The below table shows how each many unique data are replicated across storage providers.
✔️ Data replication looks healthy.
Unique Data Size | Total Deals Made | Number of Providers | Deal Percentage |
---|---|---|---|
16.00 GiB | 16.00 GiB | 1 | 0.00% |
528.00 GiB | 1.03 TiB | 2 | 0.10% |
30.34 TiB | 91.16 TiB | 3 | 8.94% |
24.22 TiB | 97.69 TiB | 4 | 9.58% |
20.67 TiB | 103.80 TiB | 5 | 10.18% |
39.75 TiB | 240.13 TiB | 6 | 23.56% |
40.94 TiB | 293.38 TiB | 7 | 28.78% |
12.66 TiB | 103.50 TiB | 8 | 10.15% |
5.84 TiB | 53.53 TiB | 9 | 5.25% |
3.25 TiB | 35.03 TiB | 10 | 3.44% |
The below table shows how many unique data are shared with other clients. Usually different applications owns different data and should not resolve to the same CID.
⚠️ CID sharing has been observed.
Other Client | Application | Total Deals Affected | Unique CIDs | Verifier |
---|---|---|---|---|
f1pkrmygbvweykpjcut36lf7ewgqdfhjklbhvepda | Protocol Labs ( project: Slingshot Evergreen ) | 142.33 TiB | 1,522 | LDN # 293 |
[^1]: To manually trigger this report, add a comment with text checker:manualTrigger
TechGreedy
f1quvbybolurp6d4xzthieupygtco6mcakwflzwya
The below table shows the distribution of storage providers that have stored data for this client.
If this is the first time a provider takes verified deal, it will be marked as new
.
For most of the datacap application, below restrictions should apply.
✔️ Storage provider distribution looks healthy.
Provider | Location | Total Deals Sealed | Percentage | Unique Data | Duplicate Deals |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
f01652333 | Sunnyvale, California, US | 181.56 TiB | 17.81% | 177.22 TiB | 2.39% |
f01732189 | San Diego, California, US | 174.97 TiB | 17.17% | 174.97 TiB | 0.00% |
f01392893 | Amsterdam, North Holland, NL | 173.34 TiB | 17.01% | 173.34 TiB | 0.00% |
f01702940 | Dallas, Texas, US | 131.39 TiB | 12.89% | 130.02 TiB | 1.05% |
f01345523 | Antwerpen, Flanders, BE | 100.23 TiB | 9.83% | 100.20 TiB | 0.03% |
f01752548 | Seattle, Washington, US | 62.98 TiB | 6.18% | 62.33 TiB | 1.04% |
f01794835 | Chengdu, Sichuan, CN | 54.70 TiB | 5.37% | 47.39 TiB | 13.37% |
f01823264 | Chengdu, Sichuan, CN | 54.16 TiB | 5.31% | 52.84 TiB | 2.42% |
f01775922 | Ashburn, Virginia, US | 35.72 TiB | 3.50% | 35.72 TiB | 0.00% |
f01611097 | San Clemente, California, US | 27.00 TiB | 2.65% | 27.00 TiB | 0.00% |
f039940 | Chengdu, Sichuan, CN | 21.53 TiB | 2.11% | 21.03 TiB | 2.32% |
f01732188 | Chicago, Illinois, US | 1.44 TiB | 0.14% | 1.44 TiB | 0.00% |
f034258 | Chengdu, Sichuan, CN | 224.00 GiB | 0.02% | 224.00 GiB | 0.00% |
The below table shows how each many unique data are replicated across storage providers.
✔️ Data replication looks healthy.
Unique Data Size | Total Deals Made | Number of Providers | Deal Percentage |
---|---|---|---|
16.00 GiB | 16.00 GiB | 1 | 0.00% |
528.00 GiB | 1.03 TiB | 2 | 0.10% |
30.34 TiB | 91.16 TiB | 3 | 8.94% |
24.22 TiB | 97.69 TiB | 4 | 9.58% |
20.67 TiB | 103.80 TiB | 5 | 10.18% |
39.75 TiB | 240.13 TiB | 6 | 23.56% |
40.94 TiB | 293.38 TiB | 7 | 28.78% |
12.66 TiB | 103.50 TiB | 8 | 10.15% |
5.84 TiB | 53.53 TiB | 9 | 5.25% |
3.25 TiB | 35.03 TiB | 10 | 3.44% |
The below table shows how many unique data are shared with other clients. Usually different applications owns different data and should not resolve to the same CID.
⚠️ CID sharing has been observed.
Other Client | Application | Total Deals Affected | Unique CIDs | Verifier |
---|---|---|---|---|
f1pkrmygbvweykpjcut36lf7ewgqdfhjklbhvepda | Protocol Labs ( project: Slingshot Evergreen ) | 142.33 TiB | 1,522 | LDN # 293 |
[^1]: To manually trigger this report, add a comment with text checker:manualTrigger
TechGreedy
f1quvbybolurp6d4xzthieupygtco6mcakwflzwya
The below table shows the distribution of storage providers that have stored data for this client.
If this is the first time a provider takes verified deal, it will be marked as new
.
For most of the datacap application, below restrictions should apply.
✔️ Storage provider distribution looks healthy.
Provider | Location | Total Deals Sealed | Percentage | Unique Data | Duplicate Deals |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
f01652333 | Sunnyvale, California, US | 181.56 TiB | 17.81% | 177.22 TiB | 2.39% |
f01732189 | San Diego, California, US | 174.97 TiB | 17.17% | 174.97 TiB | 0.00% |
f01392893 | Amsterdam, North Holland, NL | 173.34 TiB | 17.01% | 173.34 TiB | 0.00% |
f01702940 | Dallas, Texas, US | 131.39 TiB | 12.89% | 130.02 TiB | 1.05% |
f01345523 | Antwerpen, Flanders, BE | 100.23 TiB | 9.83% | 100.20 TiB | 0.03% |
f01752548 | Seattle, Washington, US | 62.98 TiB | 6.18% | 62.33 TiB | 1.04% |
f01794835 | Chengdu, Sichuan, CN | 54.70 TiB | 5.37% | 47.39 TiB | 13.37% |
f01823264 | Chengdu, Sichuan, CN | 54.16 TiB | 5.31% | 52.84 TiB | 2.42% |
f01775922 | Ashburn, Virginia, US | 35.72 TiB | 3.50% | 35.72 TiB | 0.00% |
f01611097 | San Clemente, California, US | 27.00 TiB | 2.65% | 27.00 TiB | 0.00% |
f039940 | Chengdu, Sichuan, CN | 21.53 TiB | 2.11% | 21.03 TiB | 2.32% |
f01732188 | Chicago, Illinois, US | 1.44 TiB | 0.14% | 1.44 TiB | 0.00% |
f034258 | Chengdu, Sichuan, CN | 224.00 GiB | 0.02% | 224.00 GiB | 0.00% |
The below table shows how each many unique data are replicated across storage providers.
✔️ Data replication looks healthy.
Unique Data Size | Total Deals Made | Number of Providers | Deal Percentage |
---|---|---|---|
16.00 GiB | 16.00 GiB | 1 | 0.00% |
528.00 GiB | 1.03 TiB | 2 | 0.10% |
30.34 TiB | 91.16 TiB | 3 | 8.94% |
24.22 TiB | 97.69 TiB | 4 | 9.58% |
20.67 TiB | 103.80 TiB | 5 | 10.18% |
39.75 TiB | 240.13 TiB | 6 | 23.56% |
40.94 TiB | 293.38 TiB | 7 | 28.78% |
12.66 TiB | 103.50 TiB | 8 | 10.15% |
5.84 TiB | 53.53 TiB | 9 | 5.25% |
3.25 TiB | 35.03 TiB | 10 | 3.44% |
The below table shows how many unique data are shared with other clients. Usually different applications owns different data and should not resolve to the same CID.
⚠️ CID sharing has been observed.
Other Client | Application | Total Deals Affected | Unique CIDs | Verifier |
---|---|---|---|---|
f1pkrmygbvweykpjcut36lf7ewgqdfhjklbhvepda | Protocol Labs ( project: Slingshot Evergreen ) | 142.33 TiB | 1,522 | LDN # 293 |
[^1]: To manually trigger this report, add a comment with text checker:manualTrigger
TechGreedy
f1quvbybolurp6d4xzthieupygtco6mcakwflzwya
The below table shows the distribution of storage providers that have stored data for this client.
If this is the first time a provider takes verified deal, it will be marked as new
.
For most of the datacap application, below restrictions should apply.
✔️ Storage provider distribution looks healthy.
Provider | Location | Total Deals Sealed | Percentage | Unique Data | Duplicate Deals |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
f01652333 | Sunnyvale, California, US | 181.56 TiB | 17.81% | 177.22 TiB | 2.39% |
f01732189 | San Diego, California, US | 174.97 TiB | 17.17% | 174.97 TiB | 0.00% |
f01392893 | Amsterdam, North Holland, NL | 173.34 TiB | 17.01% | 173.34 TiB | 0.00% |
f01702940 | Dallas, Texas, US | 131.39 TiB | 12.89% | 130.02 TiB | 1.05% |
f01345523 | Antwerpen, Flanders, BE | 100.23 TiB | 9.83% | 100.20 TiB | 0.03% |
f01752548 | Seattle, Washington, US | 62.98 TiB | 6.18% | 62.33 TiB | 1.04% |
f01794835 | Chengdu, Sichuan, CN | 54.70 TiB | 5.37% | 47.39 TiB | 13.37% |
f01823264 | Chengdu, Sichuan, CN | 54.16 TiB | 5.31% | 52.84 TiB | 2.42% |
f01775922 | Ashburn, Virginia, US | 35.72 TiB | 3.50% | 35.72 TiB | 0.00% |
f01611097 | San Clemente, California, US | 27.00 TiB | 2.65% | 27.00 TiB | 0.00% |
f039940 | Chengdu, Sichuan, CN | 21.53 TiB | 2.11% | 21.03 TiB | 2.32% |
f01732188 | Chicago, Illinois, US | 1.44 TiB | 0.14% | 1.44 TiB | 0.00% |
f034258 | Chengdu, Sichuan, CN | 224.00 GiB | 0.02% | 224.00 GiB | 0.00% |
The below table shows how each many unique data are replicated across storage providers.
✔️ Data replication looks healthy.
Unique Data Size | Total Deals Made | Number of Providers | Deal Percentage |
---|---|---|---|
16.00 GiB | 16.00 GiB | 1 | 0.00% |
528.00 GiB | 1.03 TiB | 2 | 0.10% |
30.34 TiB | 91.16 TiB | 3 | 8.94% |
24.22 TiB | 97.69 TiB | 4 | 9.58% |
20.67 TiB | 103.80 TiB | 5 | 10.18% |
39.75 TiB | 240.13 TiB | 6 | 23.56% |
40.94 TiB | 293.38 TiB | 7 | 28.78% |
12.66 TiB | 103.50 TiB | 8 | 10.15% |
5.84 TiB | 53.53 TiB | 9 | 5.25% |
3.25 TiB | 35.03 TiB | 10 | 3.44% |
The below table shows how many unique data are shared with other clients. Usually different applications owns different data and should not resolve to the same CID.
⚠️ CID sharing has been observed.
Other Client | Application | Total Deals Affected | Unique CIDs | Verifier |
---|---|---|---|---|
f1pkrmygbvweykpjcut36lf7ewgqdfhjklbhvepda | Protocol Labs ( project: Slingshot Evergreen ) | 142.33 TiB | 1,522 | LDN # 293 |
[^1]: To manually trigger this report, add a comment with text checker:manualTrigger
TechGreedy
f1quvbybolurp6d4xzthieupygtco6mcakwflzwya
The below table shows the distribution of storage providers that have stored data for this client.
If this is the first time a provider takes verified deal, it will be marked as new
.
For most of the datacap application, below restrictions should apply.
✔️ Storage provider distribution looks healthy.
Provider | Location | Total Deals Sealed | Percentage | Unique Data | Duplicate Deals |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
f01652333 | Sunnyvale, California, US | 181.56 TiB | 17.81% | 177.22 TiB | 2.39% |
f01732189 | San Diego, California, US | 174.97 TiB | 17.17% | 174.97 TiB | 0.00% |
f01392893 | Amsterdam, North Holland, NL | 173.34 TiB | 17.01% | 173.34 TiB | 0.00% |
f01702940 | Dallas, Texas, US | 131.39 TiB | 12.89% | 130.02 TiB | 1.05% |
f01345523 | Antwerpen, Flanders, BE | 100.23 TiB | 9.83% | 100.20 TiB | 0.03% |
f01752548 | Seattle, Washington, US | 62.98 TiB | 6.18% | 62.33 TiB | 1.04% |
f01794835 | Chengdu, Sichuan, CN | 54.70 TiB | 5.37% | 47.39 TiB | 13.37% |
f01823264 | Chengdu, Sichuan, CN | 54.16 TiB | 5.31% | 52.84 TiB | 2.42% |
f01775922 | Ashburn, Virginia, US | 35.72 TiB | 3.50% | 35.72 TiB | 0.00% |
f01611097 | San Clemente, California, US | 27.00 TiB | 2.65% | 27.00 TiB | 0.00% |
f039940 | Chengdu, Sichuan, CN | 21.53 TiB | 2.11% | 21.03 TiB | 2.32% |
f01732188 | Chicago, Illinois, US | 1.44 TiB | 0.14% | 1.44 TiB | 0.00% |
f034258 | Chengdu, Sichuan, CN | 224.00 GiB | 0.02% | 224.00 GiB | 0.00% |
The below table shows how each many unique data are replicated across storage providers.
✔️ Data replication looks healthy.
Unique Data Size | Total Deals Made | Number of Providers | Deal Percentage |
---|---|---|---|
16.00 GiB | 16.00 GiB | 1 | 0.00% |
528.00 GiB | 1.03 TiB | 2 | 0.10% |
30.34 TiB | 91.16 TiB | 3 | 8.94% |
24.22 TiB | 97.69 TiB | 4 | 9.58% |
20.67 TiB | 103.80 TiB | 5 | 10.18% |
39.75 TiB | 240.13 TiB | 6 | 23.56% |
40.94 TiB | 293.38 TiB | 7 | 28.78% |
12.66 TiB | 103.50 TiB | 8 | 10.15% |
5.84 TiB | 53.53 TiB | 9 | 5.25% |
3.25 TiB | 35.03 TiB | 10 | 3.44% |
The below table shows how many unique data are shared with other clients. Usually different applications owns different data and should not resolve to the same CID.
⚠️ CID sharing has been observed.
Other Client | Application | Total Deals Affected | Unique CIDs | Verifier |
---|---|---|---|---|
f1pkrmygbvweykpjcut36lf7ewgqdfhjklbhvepda | Protocol Labs ( project: Slingshot Evergreen ) | 142.33 TiB | 1,522 | LDN # 293 |
[^1]: To manually trigger this report, add a comment with text checker:manualTrigger
TechGreedy
f1quvbybolurp6d4xzthieupygtco6mcakwflzwya
The below table shows the distribution of storage providers that have stored data for this client.
If this is the first time a provider takes verified deal, it will be marked as new
.
For most of the datacap application, below restrictions should apply.
✔️ Storage provider distribution looks healthy.
Provider | Location | Total Deals Sealed | Percentage | Unique Data | Duplicate Deals |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
f01652333 | Sunnyvale, California, US | 181.56 TiB | 17.81% | 177.22 TiB | 2.39% |
f01732189 | San Diego, California, US | 174.97 TiB | 17.17% | 174.97 TiB | 0.00% |
f01392893 | Amsterdam, North Holland, NL | 173.34 TiB | 17.01% | 173.34 TiB | 0.00% |
f01702940 | Dallas, Texas, US | 131.39 TiB | 12.89% | 130.02 TiB | 1.05% |
f01345523 | Antwerpen, Flanders, BE | 100.23 TiB | 9.83% | 100.20 TiB | 0.03% |
f01752548 | Seattle, Washington, US | 62.98 TiB | 6.18% | 62.33 TiB | 1.04% |
f01794835 | Chengdu, Sichuan, CN | 54.70 TiB | 5.37% | 47.39 TiB | 13.37% |
f01823264 | Chengdu, Sichuan, CN | 54.16 TiB | 5.31% | 52.84 TiB | 2.42% |
f01775922 | Ashburn, Virginia, US | 35.72 TiB | 3.50% | 35.72 TiB | 0.00% |
f01611097 | San Clemente, California, US | 27.00 TiB | 2.65% | 27.00 TiB | 0.00% |
f039940 | Chengdu, Sichuan, CN | 21.53 TiB | 2.11% | 21.03 TiB | 2.32% |
f01732188 | Chicago, Illinois, US | 1.44 TiB | 0.14% | 1.44 TiB | 0.00% |
f034258 | Chengdu, Sichuan, CN | 224.00 GiB | 0.02% | 224.00 GiB | 0.00% |
The below table shows how each many unique data are replicated across storage providers.
✔️ Data replication looks healthy.
Unique Data Size | Total Deals Made | Number of Providers | Deal Percentage |
---|---|---|---|
16.00 GiB | 16.00 GiB | 1 | 0.00% |
528.00 GiB | 1.03 TiB | 2 | 0.10% |
30.34 TiB | 91.16 TiB | 3 | 8.94% |
24.22 TiB | 97.69 TiB | 4 | 9.58% |
20.67 TiB | 103.80 TiB | 5 | 10.18% |
39.75 TiB | 240.13 TiB | 6 | 23.56% |
40.94 TiB | 293.38 TiB | 7 | 28.78% |
12.66 TiB | 103.50 TiB | 8 | 10.15% |
5.84 TiB | 53.53 TiB | 9 | 5.25% |
3.25 TiB | 35.03 TiB | 10 | 3.44% |
The below table shows how many unique data are shared with other clients. Usually different applications owns different data and should not resolve to the same CID.
⚠️ CID sharing has been observed.
Other Client | Application | Total Deals Affected | Unique CIDs | Verifier |
---|---|---|---|---|
f1pkrmygbvweykpjcut36lf7ewgqdfhjklbhvepda | Protocol Labs ( project: Slingshot Evergreen ) | 142.33 TiB | 1,522 | LDN # 293 |
[^1]: To manually trigger this report, add a comment with text checker:manualTrigger
Large Dataset Notary Application
To apply for DataCap to onboard your dataset to Filecoin, please fill out the following.
Core Information
Please respond to the questions below by replacing the text saying "Please answer here". Include as much detail as you can in your answer.
Project details
Share a brief history of your project and organization.
What is the primary source of funding for this project?
What other projects/ecosystem stakeholders is this project associated with?
Use-case details
Describe the data being stored onto Filecoin
Where was the data in this dataset sourced from?
Can you share a sample of the data? A link to a file, an image, a table, etc., are good ways to do this.
Confirm that this is a public dataset that can be retrieved by anyone on the Network (i.e., no specific permissions or access rights are required to view the data).
What is the expected retrieval frequency for this data?
For how long do you plan to keep this dataset stored on Filecoin?
DataCap allocation plan
In which geographies (countries, regions) do you plan on making storage deals?
How will you be distributing your data to storage providers? Is there an offline data transfer process?
How do you plan on choosing the storage providers with whom you will be making deals? This should include a plan to ensure the data is retrievable in the future both by you and others.
How will you be distributing deals across storage providers?
Do you have the resources/funding to start making deals as soon as you receive DataCap? What support from the community would help you onboard onto Filecoin?