Abstract: This proposal seeks to onboard Matrixed.Link as a validator for the Arbitrum One chain.
Motivation: Matrixed.Link is an experienced team that has been actively engaged with Arbitrum since 2021. We have successfully been servicing the Chainlink price feeds on Arbitrum to-date and have operated infrastructure and a Chainlink node for Gainsnetwork.io with a track record of fulfilling over 300,000 on-chain oracle requests on Arbitrum. We have also collaborated with the Tracer DAO in the early days of the chain. Our expertise in running infrastructure has contributed to the securing of hundreds of millions in Total Value Locked (TVL). With our experience and proven reliability, we aim to expand our services by also operating as a validator for the Arbitrum One chain. We are committed to the success of Arbitrum and aim to increase our involvement within the ecosystem with the support of the community.Our team consists of blockchain enthusiasts. We believe that this technology will make the world a better place. We are a pioneer in the Chainlink Network contributing to the creation of the first custom DON, which is one of the most profitable Decentralized Oracle Network to date.
Rationale: Given our current role in maintaining mission-critical infrastructure for Chainlink and Gainsnetwork.io, we are well-positioned to undertake the responsibilities of a validator. Our successful operation of bare-metal servers and utilization of reliable cloud providers globally demonstrates our ability to deliver highly secure and reliable services. By extending our capabilities to include validator services, we aim to further contribute to the stability and growth of the Arbitrum ecosystem.
Specifications: Our infrastructure includes multiple dedicated bare metal servers operating in collaboration with various cloud providers such as OVH, Hertzner and Digital Ocean. These servers are strategically distributed across different regions; including France, Germany, Finland and our own small data center/office in the Netherlands. To ensure comprehensive oversight and prompt response, we have implemented monitoring and alerting systems that incorporate Graphana and our own custom solutions. This robust infrastructure and our proficiency in running Chainlink nodes and handling on-chain oracle requests position us as a qualified candidate for the role of a validator in the Arbitrum One chain. By leveraging these established systems and our expertise, we are committed to delivering secure and reliable services consistently.
Value Add: Our team at Matrixed.Link is honored to contribute as a veteran Chainlink Node Operator by leveraging our experience and expertise to serve as a reliable validator. By joining the active validator set, we aim to strengthen the overall security and performance of the Arbitrum One chain, ensuring its continued success.
Team: Comprised of passionate individuals deeply immersed in the Blockchain and Chainlink space, the Matrixed.Link team has been actively operating Chainlink nodes and validators since 2021. Our strong understanding of the technology and unwavering commitment to the ecosystem make us well-suited to undertake the responsibilities of a validator.
Chainlink Nodes: We have successfully managed multiple Chainlink nodes, including: Polygon (Matic) Network: View our node on Polygon at https://polygonscan.com/address/0x5543ff441d3b0fcce59aa08eb52f15d27294af21 Arbitrum Network: Explore our node on Arbitrum at https://arbiscan.io/address/0x64ae501217d502be8a1d9d4a4f669fbac6a0c062 Ethereum Network: Discover our node on Ethereum at https://etherscan.io/address/0x1feec90f63b1927d1078d123a57f940e680a3abf
Read about our experience as a Chainlink Node Operator here: https://medium.com/@Matrixed.link/matrixed-link-1-year-as-a-chainlink-node-operator-6afe8c6f7024https://twitter.com/chainlink/status/1512446920047923211
Our nodes operate with exceptional reliability, boasting minimal downtime and earning us a stellar reputation for delivering dependable services. Read more about our other custom Chainlink solutions here: https://medium.com/@Matrixed.link/managed-node-services-spotlight-landx-cb1a6b404ad2 https://medium.com/@Matrixed.link/weekly-project-spotlight-stake-link-bda1d9fe8be7https://medium.com/@Matrixed.link/managed-node-services-spotlight-gtrade-a8d1a240c974
Implementation Steps: To become an active validator, we will diligently execute the necessary implementation steps. This includes setting up the required infrastructure, including the installation of new bare-metal servers where applicable. Throughout the process, we will maintain close coordination with the Arbitrum team, ensuring a seamless integration and smooth operation of the validator. Our team is also willing to create extra resources to onboard/troubleshoot other validators.
Abstract: This proposal seeks to onboard Matrixed.Link as a validator for the Arbitrum One chain.
Motivation: Matrixed.Link is an experienced team that has been actively engaged with Arbitrum since 2021. We have successfully been servicing the Chainlink price feeds on Arbitrum to-date and have operated infrastructure and a Chainlink node for Gainsnetwork.io with a track record of fulfilling over 300,000 on-chain oracle requests on Arbitrum. We have also collaborated with the Tracer DAO in the early days of the chain. Our expertise in running infrastructure has contributed to the securing of hundreds of millions in Total Value Locked (TVL). With our experience and proven reliability, we aim to expand our services by also operating as a validator for the Arbitrum One chain. We are committed to the success of Arbitrum and aim to increase our involvement within the ecosystem with the support of the community.Our team consists of blockchain enthusiasts. We believe that this technology will make the world a better place. We are a pioneer in the Chainlink Network contributing to the creation of the first custom DON, which is one of the most profitable Decentralized Oracle Network to date.
Rationale: Given our current role in maintaining mission-critical infrastructure for Chainlink and Gainsnetwork.io, we are well-positioned to undertake the responsibilities of a validator. Our successful operation of bare-metal servers and utilization of reliable cloud providers globally demonstrates our ability to deliver highly secure and reliable services. By extending our capabilities to include validator services, we aim to further contribute to the stability and growth of the Arbitrum ecosystem.
Specifications: Our infrastructure includes multiple dedicated bare metal servers operating in collaboration with various cloud providers such as OVH, Hertzner and Digital Ocean. These servers are strategically distributed across different regions; including France, Germany, Finland and our own small data center/office in the Netherlands. To ensure comprehensive oversight and prompt response, we have implemented monitoring and alerting systems that incorporate Graphana and our own custom solutions. This robust infrastructure and our proficiency in running Chainlink nodes and handling on-chain oracle requests position us as a qualified candidate for the role of a validator in the Arbitrum One chain. By leveraging these established systems and our expertise, we are committed to delivering secure and reliable services consistently.
Value Add: Our team at Matrixed.Link is honored to contribute as a veteran Chainlink Node Operator by leveraging our experience and expertise to serve as a reliable validator. By joining the active validator set, we aim to strengthen the overall security and performance of the Arbitrum One chain, ensuring its continued success.
Team: Comprised of passionate individuals deeply immersed in the Blockchain and Chainlink space, the Matrixed.Link team has been actively operating Chainlink nodes and validators since 2021. Our strong understanding of the technology and unwavering commitment to the ecosystem make us well-suited to undertake the responsibilities of a validator.
Chainlink Nodes: We have successfully managed multiple Chainlink nodes, including: Polygon (Matic) Network: View our node on Polygon at https://polygonscan.com/address/0x5543ff441d3b0fcce59aa08eb52f15d27294af21 Arbitrum Network: Explore our node on Arbitrum at https://arbiscan.io/address/0x64ae501217d502be8a1d9d4a4f669fbac6a0c062 Ethereum Network: Discover our node on Ethereum at https://etherscan.io/address/0x1feec90f63b1927d1078d123a57f940e680a3abf
Read about our experience as a Chainlink Node Operator here: https://medium.com/@Matrixed.link/matrixed-link-1-year-as-a-chainlink-node-operator-6afe8c6f7024https://twitter.com/chainlink/status/1512446920047923211
Our nodes operate with exceptional reliability, boasting minimal downtime and earning us a stellar reputation for delivering dependable services. Read more about our other custom Chainlink solutions here: https://medium.com/@Matrixed.link/managed-node-services-spotlight-landx-cb1a6b404ad2 https://medium.com/@Matrixed.link/weekly-project-spotlight-stake-link-bda1d9fe8be7https://medium.com/@Matrixed.link/managed-node-services-spotlight-gtrade-a8d1a240c974
Implementation Steps: To become an active validator, we will diligently execute the necessary implementation steps. This includes setting up the required infrastructure, including the installation of new bare-metal servers where applicable. Throughout the process, we will maintain close coordination with the Arbitrum team, ensuring a seamless integration and smooth operation of the validator. Our team is also willing to create extra resources to onboard/troubleshoot other validators.
https://forum.arbitrum.foundation/t/proposal-to-onboard-matrixed-link-as-a-validator-for-arbitrum-one/15387/14?u=krst
https://forum.arbitrum.foundation/t/proposal-to-onboard-matrixed-link-as-a-validator-for-arbitrum-one/15387/13
https://forum.arbitrum.foundation/t/proposal-to-onboard-matrixed-link-as-a-validator-for-arbitrum-one/15387/14?u=krst
https://forum.arbitrum.foundation/t/proposal-to-onboard-matrixed-link-as-a-validator-for-arbitrum-one/15387/13
https://forum.arbitrum.foundation/t/proposal-to-onboard-matrixed-link-as-a-validator-for-arbitrum-one/15387/2?u=itublockchain
we need general process for operators to join, not "vote for every operator".
https://forum.arbitrum.foundation/t/proposal-to-onboard-matrixed-link-as-a-validator-for-arbitrum-one/15387/2?u=itublockchain
we need general process for operators to join, not "vote for every operator".
Hi guys,
Thankyou to everyone who took the time to reply on this proposal and those who voted on this proposal. I appreciate all the feedback you guys have provided. 45087 people voted on this proposal, which we do appreciate. I would love to keep the engagement going and find more ways to connect with the Arbitrum community.
Kind regards,
Kubilay
I will be voting yes for this proposal. Matrixed.Link has been a node operator within the Chainlink ecosystem for an extended period of time—an ecosystem which has extremely high standards of its operators in terms of uptime, resiliency, and Web3 infrastructure knowledge given the billions in TVL being secured. Operating oracle infrastructure is an extremely active process, which expands beyond the oracle node itself to the blockchain full nodes required to be an oracle.
By already being an active Chainlink node operator on Data Feeds on Arbitrum, Matrixed has an incentive to support the security of Arbitrum. Given the current set of Arbitrum validators are permissioned, any delay attacks would be extremely visible and would be resolved by simply removing that validator. If any Matrixed engages in such activity (unclear what incentives exist to do so), they would harm their own reputation as an infrastructure provider, and could jeopardize their future revenue as a Chainlink node operator.
I will be voting yes for this proposal. Matrixed.Link has been a node operator within the Chainlink ecosystem for an extended period of time—an ecosystem which has extremely high standards of its operators in terms of uptime, resiliency, and Web3 infrastructure knowledge given the billions in TVL being secured. Operating oracle infrastructure is an extremely active process, which expands beyond the oracle node itself to the blockchain full nodes required to be an oracle.
By already being an active Chainlink node operator on Data Feeds on Arbitrum, Matrixed has an incentive to support the security of Arbitrum. Given the current set of Arbitrum validators are permissioned, any delay attacks would be extremely visible and would be resolved by simply removing that validator. If any Matrixed engages in such activity (unclear what incentives exist to do so), they would harm their own reputation as an infrastructure provider, and could jeopardize their future revenue as a Chainlink node operator.
I can see why some would prefer to wait until BOLD is implemented, and while Matrixed.Link is not as well known as some other current Arbitrum validators, the 1-of-n trust model of Arbitrum as a rollup means the addition of any validator increases the network’s security. Based on this blog, the Arbitrum ecosystem also has Mycelium and P2P as validators, who are also node operators within the Chainlink ecosystem.
A note: I am a Chainlink Community Ambassador, so I know quite well what’s expected of Chainlink node operators, though I am voting in my own personal capacity. I have no affiliation with Matrixed.Link, nor do I personally benefit from Matrixed becoming an Arbitrum validator.
Hi Krst and the L2Beat governance team,
Thankyou for your comment. Really appreciate the feedback you have provided.
It is true that our website is not up-to-date with all of our information. We have neglected our website to some extent in favour of building and maintaining infrastructure in regards to some new initiatives we are involved in.
Hi Krst and the L2Beat governance team,
Thankyou for your comment. Really appreciate the feedback you have provided.
It is true that our website is not up-to-date with all of our information. We have neglected our website to some extent in favour of building and maintaining infrastructure in regards to some new initiatives we are involved in.
We do have a blogpost page on medium which are linked in the proposal. I do write some blogs now and then about initiatives we are involved in. You can read more about that here: https://medium.com/@Matrixed.link
In regards to the Linkedin links not working. We do have a company profile here: https://www.linkedin.com/company/matrixedlink/ I do post frequently here about DeFi and Web3 with the company page and my own Linkedin which you can find on that page.
We do have plans to remake the website from scratch after Smartcon2023 in Barcelona.
Kind regards,
Kubilay
Hi Blockworks,
Thank you for your comment. I would like to refer you to this article written by our friends and colleagues at LinkRiver: https://blog.linkriver.io/chainlink-node/
If you read this article you will come to find that Chainlink Node Operators always act in the best interest of the DeFi and Web3 ecosystems. Chainlink Node Operators are the backbone of DeFi and Web3.
Hi Euphoria,
I could name a few aspects of our day-to-day to give you an overview of how we approach running infrastructure and handling the challenges it poses.
Hi Euphoria,
I could name a few aspects of our day-to-day to give you an overview of how we approach running infrastructure and handling the challenges it poses.
Regarding regular maintenance and updates: We have scheduled regular maintenance checks to ensure that our systems are up-to-date and running optimally. This includes updating software, checking hardware health and performing security audits.
Regarding disaster recovery plan: In the event of a major disruption, we have a disaster recovery plan in place. This involves regular backups of critical data and configurations, as well as predefined procedures to restore operations swiftly.
Regarding dedicated response team: We have a team on standby 24/7, dedicated to addressing any immediate challenges or disruptions that might arise. Their primary focus is to ensure minimal downtime and swiftly resolve any issues.
Regarding continuous monitoring: Our internal monitoring dashboard is not just for show. It actively alerts us of any anomalies or potential issues, allowing us to address them proactively.
I hope this gives you a clearer picture of our approach towards potential challenges. We are committed to ensuring the smooth operation of the validator and are constantly refining our strategies based on new learnings and industry best practices.
Kind regards,
Kubilay
Hi Euphoria,
The projected costs are an estimate. It could be more, it could be less. We'll have to find a secure and redundant way to run the validator. This could be in the form of getting an extra bare metal server or by renting one from a cloud provider. We may need to adjust some of our scripts and tooling for failovers and alerts to work with the validator and make an internal monitoring dashboard.
Hi Euphoria,
The projected costs are an estimate. It could be more, it could be less. We'll have to find a secure and redundant way to run the validator. This could be in the form of getting an extra bare metal server or by renting one from a cloud provider. We may need to adjust some of our scripts and tooling for failovers and alerts to work with the validator and make an internal monitoring dashboard.
Kind regards,
Kubilay
Hi Curia,
Thank you for your detailed respons. The Chainlink Node reputation for the price feeds is not yet public. Chainlink uses an internal reputation system.
Hi Curia,
Thank you for your detailed respons. The Chainlink Node reputation for the price feeds is not yet public. Chainlink uses an internal reputation system.
Regarding uptime metrics: i shared 3 of our OCR nodes. When a Chainlink node is down or not functioning properly you can see a big gap inbetween the last and newer transactions. If you look at our Polygon OCR node you can see it posts continuous transactions every few seconds and has not experienced any major downtime since it has been live. It already has a history of close to 5million transactions. Our internal reputation at Chainlink is among the top. As one of the top performing Chainlink node operators we get a steady flow of jobs. We have recently been given an oppprtunity to deploy on the Base blockchain by Coinbase and we had the opportunity to build a custom usecase for Tangible.Store to bring realestate onchain for USDR collaterizarion usage.
Regarding incident management: We are a veteran Chainlink node operator. We have numerous custom scripts that help eith failovers and alerting. We have not had any major issues regarding running and maintaining Chainlink nodes for the Chainlink price feeds. Chainlink has never used our emergency redphone yet. We run clusters of 6-8 fullnodes per chain that connect to our own premium endpoint-service. By being one of the initial Node Operators and infrasteucture providers for the GainsNetwork custom DON we have built up a stellar trackrecord. There has not yet been a single oracle exploit or major downtime for GainsNetwork as of today since its inception in 2021. Running a custom Chainlink DON succesfully is one of the hardest things to do in all of DeFi and that's why we run the only successfull custom DON that is one of the most profitable DONs.
Regarding performance metrics: I have no metrics regarding this. Things you could look at on the adresses i provided are the number of reverted transactions. We have close to none. Our internal reputation with Chainlink is among the top-performing node operators and the same can be said for GainsNetwork. We have also worked together with one of the current validators: Mycelium/PierTwo. We are also one of the initial node operators of the Stake.Link DAO, which consists of only top performing Chainlink node operators.
Regarding economic indicators: You can check this adress on multiple chains for our economics: https://etherscan.io/address/matrixedlink.eth
Every $LINK we have earned to date has flown through that adress, so it should be easy for you to calculate everything regarding gas spendings and onchain profits.
A Dune dashboard is being worked on for metrics as you have requested, but that is not yet released. It should be available soon.
If you have any other questions, i would love to answer them.
Kind regards,
Kubilay
Hi guys,
Thankyou to everyone who took the time to reply on this proposal and those who voted on this proposal. I appreciate all the feedback you guys have provided. 45087 people voted on this proposal, which we do appreciate. I would love to keep the engagement going and find more ways to connect with the Arbitrum community.
Kind regards,
Kubilay
I will be voting yes for this proposal. Matrixed.Link has been a node operator within the Chainlink ecosystem for an extended period of time—an ecosystem which has extremely high standards of its operators in terms of uptime, resiliency, and Web3 infrastructure knowledge given the billions in TVL being secured. Operating oracle infrastructure is an extremely active process, which expands beyond the oracle node itself to the blockchain full nodes required to be an oracle.
By already being an active Chainlink node operator on Data Feeds on Arbitrum, Matrixed has an incentive to support the security of Arbitrum. Given the current set of Arbitrum validators are permissioned, any delay attacks would be extremely visible and would be resolved by simply removing that validator. If any Matrixed engages in such activity (unclear what incentives exist to do so), they would harm their own reputation as an infrastructure provider, and could jeopardize their future revenue as a Chainlink node operator.
I will be voting yes for this proposal. Matrixed.Link has been a node operator within the Chainlink ecosystem for an extended period of time—an ecosystem which has extremely high standards of its operators in terms of uptime, resiliency, and Web3 infrastructure knowledge given the billions in TVL being secured. Operating oracle infrastructure is an extremely active process, which expands beyond the oracle node itself to the blockchain full nodes required to be an oracle.
By already being an active Chainlink node operator on Data Feeds on Arbitrum, Matrixed has an incentive to support the security of Arbitrum. Given the current set of Arbitrum validators are permissioned, any delay attacks would be extremely visible and would be resolved by simply removing that validator. If any Matrixed engages in such activity (unclear what incentives exist to do so), they would harm their own reputation as an infrastructure provider, and could jeopardize their future revenue as a Chainlink node operator.
I can see why some would prefer to wait until BOLD is implemented, and while Matrixed.Link is not as well known as some other current Arbitrum validators, the 1-of-n trust model of Arbitrum as a rollup means the addition of any validator increases the network’s security. Based on this blog, the Arbitrum ecosystem also has Mycelium and P2P as validators, who are also node operators within the Chainlink ecosystem.
A note: I am a Chainlink Community Ambassador, so I know quite well what’s expected of Chainlink node operators, though I am voting in my own personal capacity. I have no affiliation with Matrixed.Link, nor do I personally benefit from Matrixed becoming an Arbitrum validator.
Hi Krst and the L2Beat governance team,
Thankyou for your comment. Really appreciate the feedback you have provided.
It is true that our website is not up-to-date with all of our information. We have neglected our website to some extent in favour of building and maintaining infrastructure in regards to some new initiatives we are involved in.
Hi Krst and the L2Beat governance team,
Thankyou for your comment. Really appreciate the feedback you have provided.
It is true that our website is not up-to-date with all of our information. We have neglected our website to some extent in favour of building and maintaining infrastructure in regards to some new initiatives we are involved in.
We do have a blogpost page on medium which are linked in the proposal. I do write some blogs now and then about initiatives we are involved in. You can read more about that here: https://medium.com/@Matrixed.link
In regards to the Linkedin links not working. We do have a company profile here: https://www.linkedin.com/company/matrixedlink/ I do post frequently here about DeFi and Web3 with the company page and my own Linkedin which you can find on that page.
We do have plans to remake the website from scratch after Smartcon2023 in Barcelona.
Kind regards,
Kubilay
Hi Blockworks,
Thank you for your comment. I would like to refer you to this article written by our friends and colleagues at LinkRiver: https://blog.linkriver.io/chainlink-node/
If you read this article you will come to find that Chainlink Node Operators always act in the best interest of the DeFi and Web3 ecosystems. Chainlink Node Operators are the backbone of DeFi and Web3.
Hi Euphoria,
I could name a few aspects of our day-to-day to give you an overview of how we approach running infrastructure and handling the challenges it poses.
Hi Euphoria,
I could name a few aspects of our day-to-day to give you an overview of how we approach running infrastructure and handling the challenges it poses.
Regarding regular maintenance and updates: We have scheduled regular maintenance checks to ensure that our systems are up-to-date and running optimally. This includes updating software, checking hardware health and performing security audits.
Regarding disaster recovery plan: In the event of a major disruption, we have a disaster recovery plan in place. This involves regular backups of critical data and configurations, as well as predefined procedures to restore operations swiftly.
Regarding dedicated response team: We have a team on standby 24/7, dedicated to addressing any immediate challenges or disruptions that might arise. Their primary focus is to ensure minimal downtime and swiftly resolve any issues.
Regarding continuous monitoring: Our internal monitoring dashboard is not just for show. It actively alerts us of any anomalies or potential issues, allowing us to address them proactively.
I hope this gives you a clearer picture of our approach towards potential challenges. We are committed to ensuring the smooth operation of the validator and are constantly refining our strategies based on new learnings and industry best practices.
Kind regards,
Kubilay
Hi Euphoria,
The projected costs are an estimate. It could be more, it could be less. We'll have to find a secure and redundant way to run the validator. This could be in the form of getting an extra bare metal server or by renting one from a cloud provider. We may need to adjust some of our scripts and tooling for failovers and alerts to work with the validator and make an internal monitoring dashboard.
Hi Euphoria,
The projected costs are an estimate. It could be more, it could be less. We'll have to find a secure and redundant way to run the validator. This could be in the form of getting an extra bare metal server or by renting one from a cloud provider. We may need to adjust some of our scripts and tooling for failovers and alerts to work with the validator and make an internal monitoring dashboard.
Kind regards,
Kubilay
Hi Curia,
Thank you for your detailed respons. The Chainlink Node reputation for the price feeds is not yet public. Chainlink uses an internal reputation system.
Hi Curia,
Thank you for your detailed respons. The Chainlink Node reputation for the price feeds is not yet public. Chainlink uses an internal reputation system.
Regarding uptime metrics: i shared 3 of our OCR nodes. When a Chainlink node is down or not functioning properly you can see a big gap inbetween the last and newer transactions. If you look at our Polygon OCR node you can see it posts continuous transactions every few seconds and has not experienced any major downtime since it has been live. It already has a history of close to 5million transactions. Our internal reputation at Chainlink is among the top. As one of the top performing Chainlink node operators we get a steady flow of jobs. We have recently been given an oppprtunity to deploy on the Base blockchain by Coinbase and we had the opportunity to build a custom usecase for Tangible.Store to bring realestate onchain for USDR collaterizarion usage.
Regarding incident management: We are a veteran Chainlink node operator. We have numerous custom scripts that help eith failovers and alerting. We have not had any major issues regarding running and maintaining Chainlink nodes for the Chainlink price feeds. Chainlink has never used our emergency redphone yet. We run clusters of 6-8 fullnodes per chain that connect to our own premium endpoint-service. By being one of the initial Node Operators and infrasteucture providers for the GainsNetwork custom DON we have built up a stellar trackrecord. There has not yet been a single oracle exploit or major downtime for GainsNetwork as of today since its inception in 2021. Running a custom Chainlink DON succesfully is one of the hardest things to do in all of DeFi and that's why we run the only successfull custom DON that is one of the most profitable DONs.
Regarding performance metrics: I have no metrics regarding this. Things you could look at on the adresses i provided are the number of reverted transactions. We have close to none. Our internal reputation with Chainlink is among the top-performing node operators and the same can be said for GainsNetwork. We have also worked together with one of the current validators: Mycelium/PierTwo. We are also one of the initial node operators of the Stake.Link DAO, which consists of only top performing Chainlink node operators.
Regarding economic indicators: You can check this adress on multiple chains for our economics: https://etherscan.io/address/matrixedlink.eth
Every $LINK we have earned to date has flown through that adress, so it should be easy for you to calculate everything regarding gas spendings and onchain profits.
A Dune dashboard is being worked on for metrics as you have requested, but that is not yet released. It should be available soon.
If you have any other questions, i would love to answer them.
Kind regards,
Kubilay
Such a great idea. I support this proposal.
The below response reflects the views of L2Beat’s governance team, composed of @krst and @Sinkas, and it’s based on the combined research, fact-checking and ideation of the two.
Firstly, we want to thank @Kubilay_MatrixedLink for taking the time to draft and submit the proposal. There hasn’t been a similar proposal to onboard a validator in the past so we appreciate them opening the way for others, and most importantly, for drawing attention to and hopefully starting a discussion around the lack of process for onboarding validators on Arbitrum.
The below response reflects the views of L2Beat’s governance team, composed of @krst and @Sinkas, and it’s based on the combined research, fact-checking and ideation of the two.
Firstly, we want to thank @Kubilay_MatrixedLink for taking the time to draft and submit the proposal. There hasn’t been a similar proposal to onboard a validator in the past so we appreciate them opening the way for others, and most importantly, for drawing attention to and hopefully starting a discussion around the lack of process for onboarding validators on Arbitrum.
After careful consideration and discussion, we are voting AGAINST this proposal in the temperature check. However, we would like to stress out that this is not a vote against Matrixed.Link or adding new validators in general, simply we feel we are not ready to vote for it yet.
Our reasoning is as follows:
there has been little discussion of this proposal to this day. The proposal had garnered 0 comments since its submission on July 10th, only to receive replies once it was submitted on Snapshot (because people voting went to the forums for context). While we understand that getting attention is difficult, we would advise the proposer to reach out directly to delegates or at least show up on a monthly community call to introduce themselves to ArbitrumDAO and facilitate feedback on their proposal.
we don't know much about Matrixed.Link and we couldn’t find all the information we were looking for at their website. There were some dead links (like terms & and policy, which is important information in the context of the proposal), we couldn't find more detailed information about the company or the team (the LinkedIn links on the website don't work), the blog part of the website is empty. This raises questions about credibility - we're not saying the company isn't credible, we're just lacking information at this point. This can be easily fixed through a discussion later on.
as a DAO we lack the processes to onboard new validators (or remove existing ones). The current set of validators was set up before the DAO was formed, and we haven't discussed how we are going to manage the set of validators, which includes a discussion of incentivizing validators. We think it's high time to have that discussion, and it's good that this proposal brings it up.
managing the validator list is a security issue and shouldn’t be rushed or taken lightly. This is not an issue where the DAO should prioritize speed and agility over full understanding and thoughtful decision making.
In summary, we believe that more discussion is needed before we can support this proposal. However, we are already committed to participating in this discussion and can help facilitate it in the coming weeks.
Our primary expectations from a team aspiring to take the role of validator is constant validation and trustworthiness. A team must be properly outfitted and have the required technical infrastructure in order to fulfill these objectives.
Given their long-term successful operation as a Chainlink node and the services they have provided to Arbitrum, Matrixed.Link team appears to have met these requirements. Their technical infrastructure and experience makes Matrixed.Link a suitable validator to the Arbitrum ecosystem.
Our primary expectations from a team aspiring to take the role of validator is constant validation and trustworthiness. A team must be properly outfitted and have the required technical infrastructure in order to fulfill these objectives.
Given their long-term successful operation as a Chainlink node and the services they have provided to Arbitrum, Matrixed.Link team appears to have met these requirements. Their technical infrastructure and experience makes Matrixed.Link a suitable validator to the Arbitrum ecosystem.
Considering all the things mentioned above, we have decided to support onboarding Matrixed.Link as a validator.
Blockworks Research is voting against adding matrixed.link as a validator. Validators (with the current fraud proof mechanism) have the ability to cause delay attacks and make the network more or less unusable, albeit at a cost. This attack vector means we must have full confidence in each additional validator. Given that a proposal to implement BOLD is expected this year, we'd prefer to see matrixed.link as a validator after that implementation.
Hi Kubilay,
Thank you for outlining your comprehensive approach to infrastructure management and challenges. Your commitment to regular maintenance, disaster recovery, dedicated response, and continuous monitoring is impressive and reassuring. Your team's dedication to refining strategies based on learnings and best practices is admirable.
Wishing you all the best in this endeavor!
Hi Kubilay,
Thank you for clarifying the projected costs and the potential factors that could influence them. It's great to see your commitment to ensuring a secure and redundant setup for the validator. Your focus on failovers, alerts, and internal monitoring dashboard sounds comprehensive and promising, especially in enhancing the reliability of the validator's operation.
Hi Kubilay,
Thank you for clarifying the projected costs and the potential factors that could influence them. It's great to see your commitment to ensuring a secure and redundant setup for the validator. Your focus on failovers, alerts, and internal monitoring dashboard sounds comprehensive and promising, especially in enhancing the reliability of the validator's operation.
Building on this, could you provide some insights into how your team plans to handle potential challenges or disruptions that might arise in the validator's operation? Understanding your mitigation strategies would provide a more holistic view of your approach.
I'm truly excited to see the Matrixed.Link team's extensive experience in managing Chainlink nodes and their commitment to the success of the Arbitrum ecosystem. The fact that they have a proven track record of handling significant amounts of on-chain oracle requests on Arbitrum instills a lot of confidence in their ability to serve as validators.
One question I have is regarding the projected cost of $2,000 per month for implementing the validator. Could you provide a breakdown of how this cost is distributed? Understanding the allocation of resources and development time will help the community better grasp the financial aspect of this proposal.
I'm truly excited to see the Matrixed.Link team's extensive experience in managing Chainlink nodes and their commitment to the success of the Arbitrum ecosystem. The fact that they have a proven track record of handling significant amounts of on-chain oracle requests on Arbitrum instills a lot of confidence in their ability to serve as validators.
One question I have is regarding the projected cost of $2,000 per month for implementing the validator. Could you provide a breakdown of how this cost is distributed? Understanding the allocation of resources and development time will help the community better grasp the financial aspect of this proposal.
Overall, Matrixed.Link's proposal seems to bring a lot of value to the table, and I'm looking forward to hearing more about their plans for further strengthening the security and reliability of the Arbitrum One chain.
Such a great idea. I support this proposal.
The below response reflects the views of L2Beat’s governance team, composed of @krst and @Sinkas, and it’s based on the combined research, fact-checking and ideation of the two.
Firstly, we want to thank @Kubilay_MatrixedLink for taking the time to draft and submit the proposal. There hasn’t been a similar proposal to onboard a validator in the past so we appreciate them opening the way for others, and most importantly, for drawing attention to and hopefully starting a discussion around the lack of process for onboarding validators on Arbitrum.
The below response reflects the views of L2Beat’s governance team, composed of @krst and @Sinkas, and it’s based on the combined research, fact-checking and ideation of the two.
Firstly, we want to thank @Kubilay_MatrixedLink for taking the time to draft and submit the proposal. There hasn’t been a similar proposal to onboard a validator in the past so we appreciate them opening the way for others, and most importantly, for drawing attention to and hopefully starting a discussion around the lack of process for onboarding validators on Arbitrum.
After careful consideration and discussion, we are voting AGAINST this proposal in the temperature check. However, we would like to stress out that this is not a vote against Matrixed.Link or adding new validators in general, simply we feel we are not ready to vote for it yet.
Our reasoning is as follows:
there has been little discussion of this proposal to this day. The proposal had garnered 0 comments since its submission on July 10th, only to receive replies once it was submitted on Snapshot (because people voting went to the forums for context). While we understand that getting attention is difficult, we would advise the proposer to reach out directly to delegates or at least show up on a monthly community call to introduce themselves to ArbitrumDAO and facilitate feedback on their proposal.
we don't know much about Matrixed.Link and we couldn’t find all the information we were looking for at their website. There were some dead links (like terms & and policy, which is important information in the context of the proposal), we couldn't find more detailed information about the company or the team (the LinkedIn links on the website don't work), the blog part of the website is empty. This raises questions about credibility - we're not saying the company isn't credible, we're just lacking information at this point. This can be easily fixed through a discussion later on.
as a DAO we lack the processes to onboard new validators (or remove existing ones). The current set of validators was set up before the DAO was formed, and we haven't discussed how we are going to manage the set of validators, which includes a discussion of incentivizing validators. We think it's high time to have that discussion, and it's good that this proposal brings it up.
managing the validator list is a security issue and shouldn’t be rushed or taken lightly. This is not an issue where the DAO should prioritize speed and agility over full understanding and thoughtful decision making.
In summary, we believe that more discussion is needed before we can support this proposal. However, we are already committed to participating in this discussion and can help facilitate it in the coming weeks.
Our primary expectations from a team aspiring to take the role of validator is constant validation and trustworthiness. A team must be properly outfitted and have the required technical infrastructure in order to fulfill these objectives.
Given their long-term successful operation as a Chainlink node and the services they have provided to Arbitrum, Matrixed.Link team appears to have met these requirements. Their technical infrastructure and experience makes Matrixed.Link a suitable validator to the Arbitrum ecosystem.
Our primary expectations from a team aspiring to take the role of validator is constant validation and trustworthiness. A team must be properly outfitted and have the required technical infrastructure in order to fulfill these objectives.
Given their long-term successful operation as a Chainlink node and the services they have provided to Arbitrum, Matrixed.Link team appears to have met these requirements. Their technical infrastructure and experience makes Matrixed.Link a suitable validator to the Arbitrum ecosystem.
Considering all the things mentioned above, we have decided to support onboarding Matrixed.Link as a validator.
Blockworks Research is voting against adding matrixed.link as a validator. Validators (with the current fraud proof mechanism) have the ability to cause delay attacks and make the network more or less unusable, albeit at a cost. This attack vector means we must have full confidence in each additional validator. Given that a proposal to implement BOLD is expected this year, we'd prefer to see matrixed.link as a validator after that implementation.
Hi Kubilay,
Thank you for outlining your comprehensive approach to infrastructure management and challenges. Your commitment to regular maintenance, disaster recovery, dedicated response, and continuous monitoring is impressive and reassuring. Your team's dedication to refining strategies based on learnings and best practices is admirable.
Wishing you all the best in this endeavor!
Hi Kubilay,
Thank you for clarifying the projected costs and the potential factors that could influence them. It's great to see your commitment to ensuring a secure and redundant setup for the validator. Your focus on failovers, alerts, and internal monitoring dashboard sounds comprehensive and promising, especially in enhancing the reliability of the validator's operation.
Hi Kubilay,
Thank you for clarifying the projected costs and the potential factors that could influence them. It's great to see your commitment to ensuring a secure and redundant setup for the validator. Your focus on failovers, alerts, and internal monitoring dashboard sounds comprehensive and promising, especially in enhancing the reliability of the validator's operation.
Building on this, could you provide some insights into how your team plans to handle potential challenges or disruptions that might arise in the validator's operation? Understanding your mitigation strategies would provide a more holistic view of your approach.
I'm truly excited to see the Matrixed.Link team's extensive experience in managing Chainlink nodes and their commitment to the success of the Arbitrum ecosystem. The fact that they have a proven track record of handling significant amounts of on-chain oracle requests on Arbitrum instills a lot of confidence in their ability to serve as validators.
One question I have is regarding the projected cost of $2,000 per month for implementing the validator. Could you provide a breakdown of how this cost is distributed? Understanding the allocation of resources and development time will help the community better grasp the financial aspect of this proposal.
I'm truly excited to see the Matrixed.Link team's extensive experience in managing Chainlink nodes and their commitment to the success of the Arbitrum ecosystem. The fact that they have a proven track record of handling significant amounts of on-chain oracle requests on Arbitrum instills a lot of confidence in their ability to serve as validators.
One question I have is regarding the projected cost of $2,000 per month for implementing the validator. Could you provide a breakdown of how this cost is distributed? Understanding the allocation of resources and development time will help the community better grasp the financial aspect of this proposal.
Overall, Matrixed.Link's proposal seems to bring a lot of value to the table, and I'm looking forward to hearing more about their plans for further strengthening the security and reliability of the Arbitrum One chain.
We lean towards not supporting this proposal in its current form. Matrixed.Link's dedication to the Arbitrum ecosystem is evident, and their experience as a validator is commendable. However, a significant aspect seems to be missing. A comprehensive account of Matrixed.Link's performance as a Chainlink node operator is essential, considering the critical role validators play in safeguarding the Arbitrum One chain's security and integrity. Before casting our vote in favor, we'd appreciate some deeper insights into their Chainlink node operations.
Areas for Clarification:
We lean towards not supporting this proposal in its current form. Matrixed.Link's dedication to the Arbitrum ecosystem is evident, and their experience as a validator is commendable. However, a significant aspect seems to be missing. A comprehensive account of Matrixed.Link's performance as a Chainlink node operator is essential, considering the critical role validators play in safeguarding the Arbitrum One chain's security and integrity. Before casting our vote in favor, we'd appreciate some deeper insights into their Chainlink node operations.
Areas for Clarification:
While Matrixed.Link's expertise is certainly valuable, a comprehensive assessment of their previous performance in relevant roles important to our decision-making.
Additionally, we'd like to emphasize that although individual proposals give insight into a potential validator's credentials, there's a need for a standardized and clear process for validator onboarding. By shifting from voting on each operator to a more streamlined approach, both the community and potential validators stand to benefit. Such a process ensures consistent scrutiny levels and a faster onboarding approach, mitigating biases or possible oversights.
Given the proposal's current state and our outlined concerns, we're leaning towards a 'against' vote. However, we remain optimistic that with the right enhancements, a more streamlined and transparent approach for validators can be realized.
We lean towards not supporting this proposal in its current form. Matrixed.Link's dedication to the Arbitrum ecosystem is evident, and their experience as a validator is commendable. However, a significant aspect seems to be missing. A comprehensive account of Matrixed.Link's performance as a Chainlink node operator is essential, considering the critical role validators play in safeguarding the Arbitrum One chain's security and integrity. Before casting our vote in favor, we'd appreciate some deeper insights into their Chainlink node operations.
Areas for Clarification:
We lean towards not supporting this proposal in its current form. Matrixed.Link's dedication to the Arbitrum ecosystem is evident, and their experience as a validator is commendable. However, a significant aspect seems to be missing. A comprehensive account of Matrixed.Link's performance as a Chainlink node operator is essential, considering the critical role validators play in safeguarding the Arbitrum One chain's security and integrity. Before casting our vote in favor, we'd appreciate some deeper insights into their Chainlink node operations.
Areas for Clarification:
While Matrixed.Link's expertise is certainly valuable, a comprehensive assessment of their previous performance in relevant roles important to our decision-making.
Additionally, we'd like to emphasize that although individual proposals give insight into a potential validator's credentials, there's a need for a standardized and clear process for validator onboarding. By shifting from voting on each operator to a more streamlined approach, both the community and potential validators stand to benefit. Such a process ensures consistent scrutiny levels and a faster onboarding approach, mitigating biases or possible oversights.
Given the proposal's current state and our outlined concerns, we're leaning towards a 'against' vote. However, we remain optimistic that with the right enhancements, a more streamlined and transparent approach for validators can be realized.
