2nd Community Review of CloudX Lab Allocator

[CloudX-Lab]

Latest Allocator Report: https://compliance.allocator.tech/report/f03019835/1730884084/report.md

2 clients receiving allocations over several rounds.
CloudX-Lab/filecion#17
cid report: https://check.allocator.tech/report/CloudX-Lab/filecion/issues/17/1730369584439.md

CloudX-Lab/filecion#21
cid report: https://check.allocator.tech/report/CloudX-Lab/filecion/issues/21/1730788248830.md

We have requested from client for KYC, latest sp list, and improving success retrieval rate.

This client has increasing their retrieval rate. I will update their retrieval rate.

[filecoin-watchdog]

@CloudX-Lab
Allocator Application
Compliance Report
1st Review
1st Review score: 2.5PiB

Note: Some configuration for this client seems incorrect, influencing compliance report output (missing issues, incorrect datacap-bot messages).

2.5 PiB granted to new clients:

Client Name	DC	status
NOAA	0.7PiB	New
POLAR GEOSPATIAL CENTER	1.7PiB	New

NOAA

• The allocator asked additional questions to the form and correctly noted that the data prepared by the client was already stored on the filecoin. However, the client should have specified more precisely what data he plans to store, providing a narrowed scope of data. Especially since, in this case, there is much more data from NOAA, and the topic of storing it in filecoin comes up regularly.
• The allocator pointed out that the SPs list doesn’t match the one provided in the form.
• The newest report shows that 1 out of 6 SPs has a retrieval rate of 0%.
• Was the KYC performed? If so, how was it done?
• According to the allocation schedule described in the allocator application, the first tranche should be 5%, which should be 100TiB for this client, while the first tranche was 256TiB. Why the change?

POLAR GEOSPATIAL CENTER

• this data was stored several times on the filecoin https://github.com/search?q=repo%3Afilecoin-project%2Ffilecoin-plus-large-datasets+arcticdem&type=issues
• Was the KYC performed? If so, how was it done?
• Some additional questions were asked, yet there is not enough information on data preparation.
• According to the allocation schedule described in the allocator application, the first tranche should be 5%, which should be 100TiB for this client. The first tranche was 516TiB. Also, it was declared that the max allocation per client will be 500TiB, while this client got 767TiB on the third tranche. Why the changes?
• The latest report shows retrieval at a quite good level, distribution and replicas good.

---

The most important thing in this review, though, is that the allocator has not shown any activity towards becoming an automatic allocator, which is completely inconsistent with the allocator application. This was raised in the last review; unfortunately, nothing has changed.