With hashstore i run 4 with different ips on every node for 18 tb hdd. No problem at all.
So we clearly see, that everyone is trying to go around the /24 rule.
You are all forgetting race conditions too. If my node gets so slow because of overload or something else, my node drops in the selection. And other nodes are faster to get the data and I go out with nothing. Or am I wrong with this one?
I think you’re right that there’s a limit. But without the /24 rule everyone running 1-node-per-HDD could easily go to 5-node-per-HDD overnight and not lose anything.
I think the rule should stay.
I would leave the rule as the default but add a mechanism where SNO can apply for specific node IDs to be exempt from this rule. This could also come with additional terms — minimum time on the network, once a year, and so on.
This way the money currently going into address space could go into whatever instead, including lowering the payouts.
I let AI create a script for me and it calculated everything togerther fot the last 12 months. It it cleearly shows that Repair is always higher the egress
+----------------+-----------------+---------------+---------------+
| Monat | Normaler Egress | Repair-Egress | Egress gesamt |
+-==============-+-===============-+-=============-+-=============-+
| August 2025 | 1,58 TB | 2,22 TB | 3,80 TB |
| September 2025 | 1,34 TB | 4,11 TB | 5,44 TB |
| Oktober 2025 | 1,56 TB | 6,10 TB | 7,66 TB |
| November 2025 | 1,61 TB | 4,75 TB | 6,36 TB |
| Dezember 2025 | 1,64 TB | 2,95 TB | 4,59 TB |
| Januar 2026 | 1,79 TB | 2,00 TB | 3,79 TB |
| Februar 2026 | 1,80 TB | 1,36 TB | 3,16 TB |
| März 2026 | 1,18 TB | 1,30 TB | 2,48 TB |
| April 2026 | 1,06 TB | 1,97 TB | 3,03 TB |
| Mai 2026 | 1,31 TB | 2,32 TB | 3,63 TB |
| Juni 2026 | 1,46 TB | 3,25 TB | 4,71 TB |
| Juli 2026 | 1,38 TB | 1,82 TB | 3,20 TB |
+----------------+-----------------+---------------+---------------+
| Monate gesamt | 17,71 TB | 34,14 TB | 51,85 TB |
+----------------+-----------------+---------------+---------------+
There you can see, that repair is almost double of normal egress. I dont see the 10% nor do i see it getting any better.
Neither. A number of folks here seem to think it’s binary, either free or profitable.
It cannot be free, because nobody will participate.
It cannot be profitable, because then storj could rent VPSes in the datacenters themselves, they would not need SNO.
The middle ground — where it’s better than an alternative without being profitable outright is where it should be.
Now it sits above that, being borderline profitable, and attracts volatile operators.
You all ignore the third option: remove the limitation for /24 subnet and replace it with limitation per IP.
Fact: my ISP allocates static IPs randomly when you contract their service, but more than once I found myself having IPs in the same subnet, eventhough they were in different cities.
Other times, I received IPs in different subnets for locations in close proximity.
So the /24 subnet rule is not a guarantee for wide geographic distribution and makes it problematic for in good faith operators.
But, a limitation is needed. Geographic distribution is needed. Dosen’t help the network to gather massive amounts of data on a few IPs.
I like that we started discussing farm expansion hoping that Storj will not die in the near future. 
This makes no difference to me.
My understanding ist that 10% of stored data needs to be repaired every month but you are comparing egress… 
It is already concentrated on a few IPs. How do you not understand that? I use 70 IPs, but all my data is stored on 2 servers at my home. Many other SNOs are in the exact same situation. This is the reality—Storj is in no position to be picky right now.
And I must say that over recent years, the price of IPs has risen significantly in my country. Inflation is everywhere: electricity, IPs, hardware. Deflation exists only in payouts from Storj Labs for 1 TB of stored data.
If the /24 rule is canceled, then maybe a 20% payment reduction will be bearable for me. But I’m pretty sure that they will reduce payments first, and after that we will be waiting a few months for them to cancel the /24 rule. And we don’t even know how they will change this rule—we should expect something stupid that will end up making things worse than they are now. So I’ll believe it when I see it.
Regarding revenu and payout cuts, my situation is like this: in the last 12 months,
- my average monthly payout was 246$/10 IPs (different subnets) (dosen’t matter how many nodes I run behind 1 IP);
- my monthly energy cost for the entire farm is around 100$.
- I run only new systems (rigs, hdd, ups) and I store 127 TB from 310 TB available (ignoring the extra overhead space).
- I am years away from getting even on ROI.
I started building my farm based on payouts and energy costs from 4+ years ago, when a 5 years ROI was realistic and OK for me.
The current payouts are a minimum acceptable for me to continue in the current sh market prices.
This is the hard truth. Selling the hardware would make more sense; even though I like participating in Storj Global Network, I also want to make some money monthly.
The other option would be that Storj cuts the payouts, but brings customers that fill my drives in less than a year.
The fact that for the last 12 months at least, the occupied space flattened, and now we have “great news” about Storj and chapter 11, it dosen’t make me a believer in the second scenario.
So this lets me with one option: if they cut payouts, I start listing my hardware on sh market and won’t GE when I sell it.
I completely agree, unnecessary expenses on renting addresses eat up a very significant part of the budget.
I agree 100%. Firstly, I’m sure that of all the possible ways to cancel /24, management will choose the stupidest one. Secondly, they’ll do it God knows when, after everyone’s already gone. So yes, if you do decide to do it, do it in one update, both the price and the limit removal. Then there’ll be some point in thinking about the math.
now were back to abolish /24 rule?
great, just run some A.i. over my posts, because i think i had good ideas in the topic years ago, but so long ago, that i already forgot them. i published everything on the forum here, go find it, the devil is in details.
Taking out the /24 limitation with no other one in place will make small SNOs leave, because they won’t get any new data, instead only node shrinkage, and concentrate the occupied space in a few spots on the planet an multinode farms behind a few IPs. This is not healty for the network.
I wonder if disclosing the fact that Storj is in trouble and filed for chapter 11 was a smart move. Now all the news outlets will create more panic and drove customers aways. Even if they settle on a good strategy, I believe the damage will be to extreme and I don’t know how and if they will recover. I don’t know if the law mandates them to disclose this, but this time the transparency dosen’t help at all.
you are right. My Brain made a big oopsi. I am sorry for that. (Maybe the heat gets into my head too much)
I corrected the numbers and it looks way better now. But still to high for my opinion.
+----------------+---------------+---------------+------------------+
| Monat | Repair-Egress | Ø Stored Data | Repair / Storage |
+-==============-+-=============-+-=============-+-================-+
| August 2025 | 2,22 TB | 18,95 TB | 11,714 % |
| September 2025 | 4,11 TB | 18,33 TB | 22,411 % |
| Oktober 2025 | 6,10 TB | 19,39 TB | 31,491 % |
| November 2025 | 4,75 TB | 20,85 TB | 22,769 % |
| Dezember 2025 | 2,95 TB | 22,14 TB | 13,332 % |
| Januar 2026 | 2,00 TB | 23,30 TB | 8,595 % |
| Februar 2026 | 1,36 TB | 23,09 TB | 5,873 % |
| März 2026 | 1,30 TB | 21,97 TB | 5,898 % |
| April 2026 | 1,97 TB | 20,73 TB | 9,480 % |
| Mai 2026 | 2,32 TB | 21,17 TB | 10,962 % |
| Juni 2026 | 3,25 TB | 22,15 TB | 14,673 % |
| Juli 2026 | 1,82 TB | 18,07 TB | 10,085 % |
+----------------+---------------+---------------+------------------+
| 12 Monate gesamt | 34,14 TB | 250,14 TB | 13,650 % |
+----------------+---------------+---------------+------------------+
If small SNO have bad connection and slow then it will not win race. Clients Also are not in one place.
It surprised me first, but now I’m realy confused about why are we discussing and stressing about payout reductions, when no official post said anything about it. Only littleskunk opened this problem, with no real evidence that this will be the case. The official statement say only that they try to convince us to give up some tokens for a share in the company. No payout refference what so ever.
Storj management can honestly say they never announced any plans for payout reduction around Chapter 11. No need to worry SNOs!
However… if littleskunk goes off on his own and gathers some numbers… well… it can’t hurt for management to look at them.
But nothing official! 
Dang bro, that’s a lot.
You could easily cut your hardware in half and sell it off and still have ample growing room for storj hosting.
(and in this current economy, used hardware sells for a good price)
Hilarious how many SNOs here are speaking up and clearly abusing VPN/VPS to get around the /24 rule.
2/3rds of the network have their IPs classified as “hosting”.
Radical idea: just initiate a massive repair to ISP only IPs and ban all the nodes behind hosting. You’ll probably reduce a lot of people in it for pure profit.