and it already making it work independently from /24 or /32
How to cheat when IP rule is completely removed? 
it is not removed, on /32 you stiil have all nodes as 1 on single external IP
To me /32 would make little difference. Only removing IP filtering completely would cut my costs significantly.
then we need prevent somehow lot of nodes on 1 hdd, that people multiply node counts.
because have 1 node/hdd is good healthy setup, if people will add like this it is OK
Any idea?
close new node making not an option, as we also will cut dont new good nodes, that will be needed in some point, so it is just not healthy.
I see no problem with higher node count. Random selection out of 300K nodes is not worse than 30K nodes. 
several node per 1 hdd is not healthy setup. we need helthy setups.
we already seen it on V2
Why? I haven’t lost a single node so far despite up to 8 nodes per hdd and 30+ hdds dying.
“Healthy” means it wins races so customers get higher speeds, and high uptime and audit scores so it’s not a burden on the repair system. That’s what a quality node looks like to the network.
Those things have almost nothing to do with how many nodes are on a HDD (until you get to high numbers). Multiple nodes will mean more impact when a single drive fails: but total-loss is rare enough the network doesn’t even notice.
May be you are eve right on some point.
if we would operate nodes on lower cost, we all can invest more to network.
Absolutely nobody needs that. Customers don’t need more space. Storj doesn’t need more satellite load. The plan is to get rid of some nodes.
If Storj makes any Chapter 11 decisions that end up creating more nodes: they’re doing it wrong. 
@littleskunk
Can we test it on saltlake how will /32 rule will looks like?
and how it will looks like without ip filtering?
may be we found that today there is no need of Ip filtering at all
when /24 rule was made, no one imagined 30k nodes
then lower network cost
Yes. We’re in the thread about lowering network costs. For Storj. So they survive as a company.
There’s no reason to do anything to lower costs for SNOs. We have too many: if some leave… that is the plan.
If SNO cost go lower, then storj can make cost more lower.
There’s no need. Storj can lower their own costs without changing anything for SNOs. In fact they are doing it: starting Sept 1st.
Yes they do, they need to get lowest price possible. Then network will work more eficiently.
also If storj will make more profit, chapter 11 outcome will be more likely positive.
As wee also need not only that storj can survive short term but also in long term, this mean development process for that need money.
1 single customer can be enough to flip this and then whining will repeat about overloaded nodes and that nodes cannot be used for something else anymore and how to limit I/O and bandwidth.
This whole discussion is so ridicoulus and pointless with the status quo of customers.
No. We need more data. Nobody will put 30 nodes on a single 16TB disk if the disk would fill fast enough with 1 node.
Also disks are quite expensive now which will probably limit node expansion anyway once a disk is full.
When SNOs costs go down storj can go lower with payment. That’s basic economics.