Storage Provider Network Incentivisation Discussion

BNB Greenfield
1

Storage Provider Network suffers from initial low usage and adoption. In the early stages you might not have enough users to pay for storage services, so, for incentivization, there could be two approaches:

1. Incentivization by the protocol;
2. Payments made by users for the service;

The end goal is for the incentivization made by the protocol to go to a very low amount in the future, or even zero while the payments made by the users will increase in time. It doesn’t make sense to have a protocol incentivization indefinitely, and it should be self-sustainable, governed by demand and offer.

In that way, the Storage Providers entities could have an active role in driving Sales and BD for getting clients to use them as Storage Providers - so you would have a BD arm for growing the ecosystem - as they would be directly interested in selling their services.

It would be very hard to scale if the BD efforts were only done by the Greenfield Core Team.

Also, from this perspective, it would be interesting for each SP to have its own pricing, to be able to give discounts, or other promotional offers in their BD approach, if you are thinking about them as entities that are looking to make profits.

To establish the incentivization of the protocol, there needs to be done some research around how much it costs to offer a fixed range of storage. Let’s say, how much it costs to host 10 TerraBytes of Data, and have an incentivization around the medium costs of a provider, at the beginning.

Of course, the strategy and philosophy behind would dictate the incentive mechanism. So further discussions should be taken.

1 Like
2

Hey, it sounds extremely interesting to build a decentralized storage ecosystem.
We ,Nebula Block (twitter@nbfsdata) located in North America and has been contribute in Filecoin, IPFS, Chia, Phala as service provider for 3 years. provide over 50PB storage capacity in the passing years.

For us the major cost are human resource and storage server/ bandwith. large scale storage provider has more capability in SLA to client, from the past experience in Filecoin storage provider business, staking as a validator is also a concern. As a testnet provider, a 500 USD equivalent incentive per node is the minimum coverage of cost for us, but other payment method as BNB also welcomed.

We can provide a test node with 50TB to cover initial needs.We are open to discussion.

3

if the incentive from the protocol, should not it be some kind of block reward?

4

If no one is depositing data into greenfield, how can SP nodes make a profit? Is it like filecoin to rely on its own stock to obtain BNB?

5

filecoin has block reward and data deal income together.
AR is the same.

6

SPs don’t earn rewards from block building. Greenfield validators are the ones who earn from block building and relaying between Greenfield and BSC.

7

in theory if nobody uploads any data to the network, then SP wouldn’t have any revenue. However similarly to Filecoin, BNB Chain has plenty of data (BSC snapshots, L2 data) and it surely can be directed to Greenfield. More importantly, there are already over 1500 dApps on BSC, and all of them have data requirements. If Greenfield is a better product than Filecoin/GCP… then applications will for sure come.

1 Like
8

Then it will be very limit SPs in the initial state, we do need some incentive plan for SPs

9

Greenfield was built with a long-term sustainable economy. Thus it doesn’t make sense to “incentivise” SPs just for participation or for available storage (similarly to Filecoin). There will always be the case, where SPs say it’s not fair and the framework needs to sponsor their participation. But this is exactly how you get to the situation where the system is totally not sustainable and the service quality is not acceptable.