If it is not a flat line you need more nodes… 
This may not apply for higher internet connection speed. I’ve got 500/500 and 4 nodes, thay never exceed around 150 mbs together. The nodes are not limiting factor, their hw utilisation is under 5% and almost no lost races. Not sure why it will not pick up more. Maybe because 3 of them are pretty new…
1 Like
I am pretty sure any internet line could look like this. All you need is nodes…and IPs of course.
1 Like
i wish all the IP’s from VPNs would be filtered.
1 Like
This would be suicide… 
1 Like
AirVPN would be happy 
Why is that? Some people have no choice due to providers network restrictions.
when you check that 99% of the AirVPN IPs have +2 SNs (thanks to Neighbors) something seems to be odd.
1 Like
Note that these nodes will receive less traffic due to recent changes to node selection algorithms, so they are already heavily penalized in terms of amount of data stored. That’s a softer approach than banning them outright, but it should bring the same benefits.
1 Like
Imagine these nodes having 1 node with the public IP and the remaining nodes with a different VPN IP each. Do you think they are already penalized?
Doing so would be against ToS.
Valid usecase for vpn is to publish service when you cannot get direct connectivity otherwise (carrier grade NAT, or isp controlled firewall, etc). Not to cheat around the /24 agregation.
Last I checked my two nodes had no neighbors. AirVPN has massive number of endpoints, I just picked the closest ones to the nodes physical locations. If there are neighbours now — why should I care? It’s either not running node or sharing traffic. Not really a dilemma.
2 Likes
oh yeah, you are right. ToS successfully prevented people from from running multiple nodes sharing cpu and HDDs in the past. I don’t know how I could think that people were using VPNs to cheat about /24 rule.
1 Like
Yeah ToS is a paper tiger. Aside from the fact that current advises from Storj aren’t aligned with current ToS, that would’ve been updated ages ago.
But essentially, if you do the math those VPNs statistically are really unimportant. So, I wouldn’t put too much effort in it because there are also good reasons to use them (like CG-NAT or privacy shielding).
And I think you’re right, people are using VPNs to circumvent the /24-rule. Speaking for myself, I have one location behind CG-NAT for which I use three different VPNs on different machines. Already in use, before the /24-rule was initiated BTW and for sure no reason to change this given the side effects.
Most people don’t. There will always be unscrupulous few that try to cheat any system. 100% compliance is unattainable and unnecessary.
But suggesting that most do, and discussing breaking tos on the company forum is not appropriate.
It’s an agreement. It does not need to be enforceable via technical means to be valid. Non-technical agreements always take precedence over implementation details.
I don’t know how much people value their integrity, but hope higher than a few bucks they can cheat from storj per moth.
3 Likes
You are the only one doing this.
Instead, i put the focus on the risks associatted with the use of VPN’s. Not only the /24 rule, but also the geofencing capability could be compromised. I am trying to address this weak spot to make the Storj network more resilient.
1 Like
I’m not sure I follow. I don’t suggest violating the tos, on the contrary.
Most vpn providers have endpoints all over the world. It’s in the operators best interest to pick the closest one to reduce latency. For my two nodes that are behind CGNAT I’m using AirVPN servers that are within 200 miles from the node location, according to IPinfo.io.
Or are you suggesting that running a node over vpn is worse than not running a node?
I’ve asked this specific question recently here on the forum and did not receive any response. I’ll try to find that thread.
1 Like
i did not suggest this neither.
No. But there is a difference between use and abuse. We all seen this recently with the Storj free tier.
1 Like
Yes, you are correct. We are happy to provide a free tier, but not when it’s abused.
You see how is it ended.
The same for VPN. But not exactly the same. There are ways how to prevent that and the simplest one is to reduce a payout… I wouldn’t like this and trying to warn people to do not abuse the limit until the safe node selection would be in place. However, after this, using a VPN just to bypass /24 will become useless…
Tell us more, sounds like a real enhancement?
We’ve gone over it already many times, but my argument wasn’t about enforceability but about disalignment between practice and these outdated terms.
I agree furthermore with you on the fact, that the majority doesn’t deviate from the underlying principles of the ToS. Not in the least, because a stable node with low latency is in interest of both Storj and the SNO.
2 Likes