TWP #0018 - URL Path forwarding fix to

edited March 6 in Proposals

TUSC Work Proposal #0018

Title: URL Path forwarding fix to

Worker ID: kentbull

Total: 7,770,000

Duration: 3/1/21 - 3/2/21

Vesting period: Daily (TUSC per day)

Work done so far: Phone diagnosis with Kristie and Rob



The web wallet should be accessible at This URL path worked prior to a node upgrade on 1/16/21. Currently the wallet is available at though to avoid SEO domain fragmentation between "" and "" the decision is to use URL path forwarding to make the wallet accessible at

Work Needed:

  1. Determine the root cause of the issue, or close enough, and determine what steps are required to enable URL path forwarding again. (1-2 hrs)
  2. Enable URL path forwarding again at the domain "" (1-2 hrs)

Cost Calculation:

Current Price: $0.00007767 as of 3:27 PM PST 3/2/21 on

Hourly Rate: $150.00

Hour estimate: 2-4 hours

Cost per hour in TUSC: 150USD * (1 TUSC / .00007767 USD) = 1,931,247.585940518 TUSC per hour

Total cost for proposal:

7,770,000 : two hours research and just over two hours implementation and discussion


  • Additional Remarks from Kristie:

    I think in the short term we just need to get a couple of redirects working so the links on all of the trackers like coingecko and CMS work

    For reasons that escape me now redirects to which obviously doesn't work. I'm not sure why the "wallet" between those two slashes is getting dropped.

    But we need the following URLs to all redirect to

    Because those are the variations the trackers are using.

  • After reviewing the following options it was decided that the best path forward is to update all the trackers and websites to point to the subdomain URL at

    Option 1: AWS Application Load balancer. Approximate monthly cost: $45-$60

    $22-$25/mo for the application load balancer, $20-$25/mo for the AWS Global Accelerator static IP

    This seems like a bit much right now. This is the most reliable option since AWS documentation is readily available and AWS also has built-in autoscaling.

    Option 2: Roll our own load balancer with NGINX or haproxy in something like DigitalOcean. Approximate monthly cost: $5.00 plus maintenance costs.

    The concern here is the cross training required to make this an effective option for the team. The initial setup costs are significant as well. This is the most flexible option. A downside is that we have to manually monitor and scale the load balancer ourselves.

    Option 3: update all the trackers to use

  • Looks good to me. You have my vote. Thanks kbull!

Sign In or Register to comment.