DashCentral -> DashLocal and under MNO control....

[joezippy]

Pre-Proposal updated please re-read and comment.

What:

Masternode Owners are requesting a proposal from the Core Team, to create a flexible open source Masternode Admin Console for Masternode Owners, with at least the UX of DashCentral.


Why:

• 55% of MNOs use DashCentral for the UI/UX
  
  
• DashCentral is centralized
  
  
• DashCentral is not open source
  
  
• It's difficult to get support and enhancements into DashCentral, as it's funded outside the proposal system by donations
  
  
• MNOs should own the proposal submission process
  
  
• MNO tools for accomplishing tasks (thinking taxes - @bituzer & @acidburn) are not audited and in some cases "one-off" scripts, which could leave MNOs exposed to vulnerabilities or added confusion regarding best practices.
  
  
• MNO could safely "disconnect" from the current "central" DashCentral server, without loosing the UX
  
  
• Open sourcing the Admin Console project in github would allow others to contribute, review, audit and enhance the tool.
  
  
• The Admin Console, might benefit from the new organizational structures the Core Team is setting up for legal reasons, as a separate project owned by MNOs
  
  
• Allow all MN installs (hosted or not) to use a common interface for:
  
  • Voting
    
    
  • Earnings
    
    
  • Up-time Status
    
    
  • Notifications
    
    
  • Incidents
• Allow for enhancements like:
  
  • Tax reporting assistance
    
    
  • Proposal submission process enhancements
    
    
  • Proposal tracking enhancements
    
    
  • Partial MN ownership voting
    
    
  • HW wallet logins
    
    
  • HW wallet starts
    
    
  • ...
• Masternode hosting providers could drop "home-brewed" admin consoles saving them time and money
  
  
• Unify Masternode Owner UI/UX support, while possibly increasing voting

Background from the Forum:

• I reached out to @rango with gratitude for his contributions, to see if keeping DashCentral was an option, while paying him for his current work effort and open sourcing the current code base. This seems like a dead end and not an option.
  
  
• I reached out to Masternode hosting providers to see if they wanted to build the Admin Console, as they likely host the majority of the nodes. This too seems like a dead end, as they, like I, lack the skilled resources to complete such a task.
  
  
• I originally suggested the Admin Console be installed on 'localhost' along side the MN service, but was concerned when the MN hosting providers didn't agree or disagree w/ this type of implementation making the idea undesirable. This design places the MNO to MN relationship w/ the Host, the whole Host and nothing but the Host.
  
  
• The forum agreed this proposal request should not slow the Evo implementation schedule, but should be considered, as the Dash architecture advances.
  
  
• MNOs responded in the forum most favorably to some type of DAPI Admin Console.
  
  
• The Admin Console design implementation will be base on the Core Team's expertise and MNO requirements.

Personally I would like to see movement on this Admin Console before the end of the year, so tax reporting support can be added in a uniform way (country independent) for all MNOs... Strength in unity and numbers.

 

[Chosen]

I think this needs to go in the DAPI somehow.

 

[joezippy]

I think this needs to go in the DAPI somehow.

Sure... I'm up for that... Any idea of the Core Teams thoughts on that? I'll try to change the poll....

 

[TroyDASH]

I like the idea of having an open source version of DashCentral/DashTreasury hosted by the masternode network, but I wouldn't put it as a high priority issue. If it can be worked on without impacting our core development then that would be great...

 

[joezippy]

Agree @TroyDASH ... I'm not interested in holding up Evo for a DashCentral like admin client from the Core Team... Which is why, I originally thought the best option was to just open source what @rango currently has... Compensating him accordingly... At that point the community could evaluate the github code and the future direction of the implementation with input from the Core, MNOs and MN hosts... I also wanted to get it on the radar w/ the Core that MNOs want this ownership and some kind of tax reporting (country independent) would be really nice by year end...

All -- If you are a MNO please vote above!

 

[joemoraca]

It seems this is focused on the technical side of having a masternode (which I don't have) and seems like a good idea. This DFN article I wrote focuses more on the proposal discussion and process - before during and after the actual vote. Would you be including that also?

 

[joezippy]

It seems this is focused on the technical side of having a masternode (which I don't have) and seems like a good idea. This DFN article I wrote focuses more on the proposal discussion and process - before during and after the actual vote. Would you be including that also?

For sure... Once the code is open sourced the additional features list above could definitely be integrated... Great input and thanks for sharing!

 

[djcrypto]

Good ideas. I'd like it to be part of a unique "MNO Client" so non-MNOs wouldn't be forced to acquire it.

 

[acidburn]

Has anyone consulted rango? What's his thoughts? Why does it need to come under mn control? I don't get what problem you're trying to solve here?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[joezippy]

Good ideas. I'd like it to be part of a unique "MNO Client" so non-MNOs wouldn't be forced to acquire it.

@djcrypto Thanks... And I agree... non-MNOs shouldn't be burdened with the "MNO Client" functionality....

Has anyone consulted rango? What's his thoughts? Why does it need to come under mn control? I don't get what problem you're trying to solve here?

@acidburn I have tagged @rango several times in the slack conversation and in this thread... With no response... Which isn't really new and yet another reason the control needs to be under the MNOs and open source.... Others need to be able to contribute to something 55% of the MNOs use.... Period. For all the other reasons see the "why" section above.

If anyone, can communicate w/ @rango please ask him to participate in this thread, as the community values his input.

 

[acidburn]

But again, rango put time and effort into this. If people don't like the direction, or anything else of it then they can go ahead and make their own version.

You don't force Microsoft to open source their windows code yet 90% of computer users use it!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[joezippy]

But again, rango put time and effort into this. If people don't like the direction, or anything else of it then they can go ahead and make their own version.

You don't force Microsoft to open source their windows code yet 90% of computer users use it!

@acidburn I'm not sure you are reading all of this thread before commenting... The community and I have recognized the effort @rango has put into DashCentral... We also, realize we can make our own version...

No one is asking @rango to give his work away... The 2'nd option states...

• Pay @rango for his current work effort and open sourcing the current code base

Please read the thread better before making these types of claims in the future... I'm working as a MNO, for MNOs not one individual and I value developers effort, as a developer. Thanks.

 

[rango]

1. Send a PM or an Email like everybody else. Nobody is able to catch up with all volatile mentions on Slack.

2. The general idea (put DC functionality on local servers) to avoid one central platform is fine, with exceptions. Comments and accounts and can't be easily distributed between local nodes.

3. DC consists of many components (globally distributed monitoring nodes, database, webserver, cronjobs, insight, external api links). It's impossible to put this on a local server and run this by a regular MNO. He is lacking the qualification to do so.

Bottom line, good idea but impossible to implement with reasonable effort.

 

[joezippy]

1. Send a PM or an Email like everybody else. Nobody is able to catch up with all volatile mentions on Slack.

@rango Thanks for the information and joining the discussion here in the forum! We will avoid discussing this in the Slack and hope you are "following" this thread, as direct email and PMs are very difficult for a community discussion... Thanks again for your effort and participation.

2. The general idea (put DC functionality on local servers) to avoid one central platform is fine, with exceptions. Comments and accounts and can't be easily distributed between local nodes.

I'm glad you agree w/ the general premise... Regarding the exceptions you mention... Comments should be / could be made in this forum and accounts that are local wouldn't need to be distributed for any reason that I can see... Maybe I'm missing something, but if we create a "DashLocal" authentication and authorization would take place locally... As in localhost... No need to distribute anything... This gets back to the "host, whole host and nothing but the host" idea for MNOs...

3. DC consists of many components (globally distributed monitoring nodes, database, webserver, cronjobs, insight, external api links). It's impossible to put this on a local server and run this by a regular MNO. He is lacking the qualification to do so.

Ok... Lets take these one at a time...

• Globally distributed monitoring nodes - If processes are on the local machine, their is no need to monitor remotely... The web container would run on the same box as the MN process....
  
• Database - These can be made local to the DashLocal install... No remote needed... Simple and supported with every web container I know.
  
• Webserver - Many lite secure open source options here with varying levels of complexity depending on what we need.
  
• Cronjobs - Native to local machines or build into web containers.
  
• Insight - Not sure what this is, but even if it's a remote open source service... It has to run locally somewhere.
• External api links - Again... If they are still required after making everything else local... Web containers make external web service API calls all the time.

Bottom line, good idea but impossible to implement with reasonable effort.

Again I'm glad you agree w/ the general premise... I don't believe in impossible and effort can be hired. Based on your comments it doesn't seem like paying you say 70-80 Dash to Open Source what you have is even an option and MNOs should take this request to the Core Team... I think most MNOs would pay that to have some folks start working on a DashLocal alternative.

Please advise on how we should proceed and thanks again for all your effort!

 

[jimbursch]

@joezippy -- I think I understand the pain points you are trying to address, and I think they are legitimate. However, I think you have limited your options for a solution.

Your solutions call for Core Team to do something, or @rango to do something, or "MN hosting services" (I don't know what that is) to do something.

Another option is to start building DashLocal and add features as you go along. You would probably get a lot of help actually building something, rather than asking somebody else to do something.

Take a look at this, which may help you to get started:
https://www.dashcentral.org/dbin

 

[joezippy]

Your solutions call for Core Team to do something, or @rango to do something, or "MN hosting services" (I don't know what that is) to do something.

Thanks @jimbursch for pointing out that you don't know what "MN hosting services" is referring too... This means the MNOs hire - splawik/flare, masternode.me, node40.com to collaborate on the admin interface for all MN called DashLocal... The open source collaboration would work for all MN, regardless if DashLocal was running on one of the 3 hosting services... Does that help? Funny how things are always clearer in your own mind...

Another option is to start building DashLocal and add features as you go along. You would probably get a lot of help actually building something, rather than asking somebody else to do something.

I completely understand this point... The problem is... I'm rusty and not up to speed with the latest technology... Here is my dilemma... Even if I could build something, as good as DashCentral with a DashLocal twist... I would have to convince the "MN hosting services" to run it... Specifically @moocowmoo as masternode.me hosts my nodes... @splawik21 do you or Moo have a desire to build this type of admin console we have been calling DashLocal... I know masternode.me has an alpha version of an admin client, but I don't think it's open source, so the community can't integrate things like taxes, voting, etc...

Anyone know what % of MN are hosted by the 3 hosting companies listed above, because my guess is that if one or more won't install "DashLocal"... Nothing will change.

Hearing other wanting change too, and saying something should be done... but not sure how to do it...

 

[Chosen]

'DashLocal' concept could handle voting by Masternode share holders

 

[splawik21]

@joezippy i have no building skills so can't help much here.

 

[joezippy]

@joezippy i have no building skills so can't help much here.

Thanks for the feedback @splawik21 .... Just a few questions, if you don't mind...

• Do you and @flare support an "admin" web client that MNOs use showing node status, earnings, etc currently?
• Would you be willing to host something like DashLocal for your MNO on your servers?
• Can you tell me about how many MN you host, so we could see the impact of you guys hosting DashLocal (if you are willing)?

Like I say, I know masternode.me has an "admin" client and @moocowmoo has a really good start... Earnings, node status, etc... But it just like DashCentral it isn't open source, so we can't build needed functions like voting, proposal tracking, etc into it...

Just wondering how to move the ball forward... Thanks!

 

[joezippy]

'DashLocal' concept could handle voting by Masternode share holders

This is a great point @Chosen and yet another reason MNOs need control of this UI/UX MN "admin client"... Can anyone ask the Core Team how they plan on doing MN share holder voting in the future w/ Evo... It would be nice to get some feedback from them on this thread and the idea of DashLocal... @Macrochip can you help w/ interaction w/ the Core? Just wondering... Thanks!