That’s a great Idea, but I have to play the devils advocate.
One of my older nodes was DQed on 1 satellite well lost some data from that satellite. No idea why no HDD issue, but the data of all other satellites is 100%.
To Be honest I think this might be super rare but personally I would like to keep this node working as data for the other 5 satellites is fine.
But otherwise I would support this idea it would protect the data integrity of the network additionally could flag possible failing nodes.
I agree that you should graceful exit if you want to leave a Satellite.
FWIW, if you’re trying to never join a Satellite to begin with, or aggressively defederate from it, you can mark the Satellite untrusted. Storage nodes have a trusted satellite system. By default, storage nodes trust the list in https://storj.io/dcs-satellites, but you can add other lists, add other satellites directly, or explicitly remove satellites from the list. The argument to exclude a Satellite is --storage2.trust.exclusions (or, in the config file as storage2.trust.exclusions), and you can just make a list of Satellites in the format of https://storj.io/dcs-satellites.
Satellites don’t currently share reputation or audit information. We have at times discussed doing this for the reasons @andrew2.hart is probably thinking of, but so far don’t, and don’t currently have plans to. We certainly are aware of more than one person in @zolbarna’s boat.
Graceful exit made no point in my case, as I made this decision at the very early age of my nodes. (I had maybe few GB data from ASIA) - I’m simply too far away.