The Arbitrators are contacting Indexer address 0x59749d1fa9635cd0413aeff5ee295490a7e87f54 and fisherman 0xfe56931ed1cd3021ef1162bae2b3872e8694d1da for a new dispute filed in the protocol.
Dispute ID: 0xb9dfcaeec43302afdee9842f7abb008d496e76719c369de3bdd37e5c7f598e2f
Allocation: 0x0ea3079581f57cd8cd92e1326cdabf084b4bbc40
Subgraph: Qme9hQY1NZ8ReVDSSQb893s2fGpeLkgfwXd3YU5rndACaP
Fisherman, could you share the insights or data you gathered that led to you filing the dispute? Please provide all relevant information and records about the open dispute. This will likely include POIs generated for the affected subgraph(s).
About the Procedure
The Arbitration Charter regulates the arbitration process. You can find it in Radicle project ID rad:git:hnrkrhnth6afcc6mnmtokbp4h9575fgrhzbay or at GIP-0009: Arbitration Charter.
Please use this forum for all communications.
Arbitration Team.
1 Like
Hi @tmigone, it’s me again 0xfe56931ed1cd3021ef1162bae2b3872e8694d1da
This dispute is same as GDR-26, closing Qme9hQY1NZ8ReVDSSQb893s2fGpeLkgfwXd3YU5rndACaP subgraph that was not 100% synced. The indexer only synced up to block 36615316, while the correct startBlock should have been 39114673 epoch 841.
1 Like
Hi @tonymontana thanks for the information.
We’ve verified the following:
- Indexer closed allocation with non-zero POI at epoch
841, indexed chain block height 39114673
- Indexer’s status endpoint reports the subgraph is not synced past block
36615316
Additionally we are in the process of validating the presented POI using other synced up indexers as reference point.
To the disputed indexer 0x59749d1fa9635cd0413aeff5ee295490a7e87f54, is there a reason why this keeps happening? Please share relevant logs for the indexer-agent and graph-node at the time the allocation was closed.
2 Likes
@tmigone It’s been over two weeks without any counterarguments from 0x59749d1fa9635cd0413aeff5ee295490a7e87f54. Shall we proceed with resolving the dispute and processing the transaction?
1 Like
The Arbitration Team has reviewed the evidence related to the recent allocation closed by indexer 0x59749d1fa9635cd0413aeff5ee295490a7e87f54 and is proceeding with a slash based on the findings outlined above. This data suggests the indexer submitted a POI for a subgraph that was not fully synced, which is grounds for slashing. In addition, we have not received a response or data from the Disputed Indexer within 20 days, which aligns with prior precedent.
1 Like