You use 5 different emails to request 5 authentication tokens, run 5 nodes with 5 differents eth addresses, but they belong to the same operator!
How’s this different then using 1 email and 5 eth addresses, 1 per node to segment payments?
If Storj had a “report” per node for payments, then yes of course, using the same payment address would make total sense, not the other way around.
Otherwise, I’m betting a lot of SNOs that see this post will have to start over and kill a few nodes.
What “won’t they”, minimizing fees? Of course, this is the point of this clause in the terms, which you agreed to. If you feel the need to breach this clause, just keep it to yourself and don’t open such threads. I’m aware that this clause is hard to enforce…
What is your use case here? Why is it so important that to you to know how much exactly each node has made and for which the earnings calculator is not accurate enough? At the end of the day the money ends up in your pocket.
No you can use same email address to get new auth tokens but
You need to first use your first auth token in order to get second auth token else you will get email with same auth token which was unused.
You can get 1 auth token every 24 hours.
You can run any number of nodes but they must all have same ethereum payment address to get paid. You cannot use 5 different ETH addresses
Now that Stefan´s satellite will be shutdown I have 2 questions please.
Where you found this info? O.o
Look, if you disagree on something it´s your problem, not mine. I´m just stating that it´s an noneffective clause to minimize transfer fees.
It would be a lot more productive if you actually contribute with constructive critics instead of just “keep it to myself”.
I´ve made a substancial investment in Storj and trully believe in the project (over 1200€ now)…don´t know about you:
I run 2 Synology´s 412+, 2 RPI´s and 2 Microserver N54L on 6 different locations in 2 countries with over 20TB shared!!!
Not even to mention 7 new SNO´s onboarded by me!
This is a real concern that I want to be compliant with ToS!
So, I suggest either you contribute positively or please abstain!
PS: Money doesn´t END in my pocket. The purpose of having family members involved in this is to break costs in half: electricity and investment. They provide the location and Internet, I provide the equipment and manage it and we share 50/50.
How can I share it if I don´t know how much each node earn?
If the nodes are managed by different people then having different ETH address is the way to go but if you claim them to be your nodes then they need to have same ETH address.
I would recommend using your family member’s email and ETH address owned by that family member for their nodes.
Ok @nerdatwork, thank you.
I think there must be some misunderstanding on my issue.
Nevermind, thank you for your help.
I´ll just kill 5 nodes and their data then, as I´m breaking ToS.
That quotes a most obviously outdated ToS sheet, since the next paragraph there forbids doing the following:
iii. Operate more than one (1) Storage Nodes behind the same IP address
which is now totally fine to do.
There are also other outdated terms in there, like:
- A minimum of 250 GB of available Space per Storage Node
- 0.5 TB of Bandwidth available per month
So I wouldn’t rely on that “one payment adress for all nodes” rule to be in effect.
@jocelyn, @Alexey, can you step in please with an official statement from the team itself?
I´m 24h away from flying with an N54L Server and a Synology 412+ with total 14TB to add to Storj and I need to know if it´s even worth the trouble.
Thank you in advance.
It’s not different for the purpose of the ToS. Both would be against ToS independent of what email addresses are used. All nodes managed by the same operator should use the same payout address.
While I think transaction costs are one argument, another would be that it hides when a single operator spins up many nodes for some reason. This may be partially a leftover concern from the V2 days. And since we know the ToS are being rewritten, I think it’s a good idea to wait and see what they will say.
So yeah, I’d hold off on this move until the new ToS has been published. And even if this clause remains, you might as well change them to use the same address instead of killing the nodes.
Thank you @BrightSilence for your input.
I definitely would use the same eth address, and adding that it would be much easier for me to…if we add a “report” of payment per nodeID for instance.
Which is not the case unfortunately!
I’d bear the transactions costs if that means using one eth address per node!
It’s the only accurate way to see how much one node is performing.
They did mention during the last town hall that more reporting features for SNOs would be added to the dashboard. This has just been lower priority in the run up to production. Which makes sense. Hopefully you’ll get better reporting to help with your use case soon enough. I don’t think anyone is coming after you for not following the ToS to the letter until then. But keep in mind that it’s unlikely Storj would confirm that as it would put them in a bad legal situation if they openly admit it’s ok to not follow parts of the ToS.
I think you’ll be fine as you’re clearly not trying to cheat the system and have good arguments for your setup. In the mean time you can use one of several tools to monitor your nodes individually. Like my earnings calculator or @Vadim’s tool to monitor several nodes from windows. In the end I hope both of these will be obsolete and storj will offer better ways to monitor natively.
Definitely not want to cheat the system! Rather the opposite, I keep promoting it, investing in it (hard) and betting on bring more people to it…
On a managing perspective, it´d be awesome to have those payment details per nodeID as it would be much more accurate to distribute earnings on my business model.
Thank you anyway for your input, I´ll just keep going and wait something changes with it
Meanwhile…2 more nodes online after tomorrow:
- 1 Synology 412+ with 12TB on a 200/100 connection
- 1 HP MicroServer N54L with 4TB (to start) in a 100/100 fiber gateway with 0ms latency
I’d like to add that both of these tools have proven very useful for me and I highly recommend checking them out!
You can check the icon that shows Storj staff @heunland agreeing to my comment.
Please don’t take drastic measures like this. When in doubt ask here or file a support ticket. We all learn through mistakes. Even Storj is learning and evolving from mistakes in V2. As suggested by @BrightSilence you can change your payout addresses to be compliant.
I wish you all the very best with your new nodes
Thank you @nerdatwork for your insights.
I will definitely do that, as soon as Storj makes available some form of reporting payments per node.
Until then, the most fair payment method to my family members and friends that share my enthusiasm in this project, is the model I´m using, where everyone is happy.
If by any means, Storj thinks I´m non compliant and decides to take other measures, I´ll deal with it
Meanwhile, I stand my case, until further accurate reporting on earnings per node, I see no other way!
Again…contribute positively as you´re the ONLY one here…insulting!
And anyway, discussion is over!
“Just treat the nodes at your family like their nodes.” - Keep your opinions to yourself, I sure didn´t ask for it!