This is true if there’s an optional L1->L2 migration solution for all domains, not only subdomains. If there’s such solution, then: it shouldn’t be optional, but rather mandatory. If L1 gets very expensive to use and L2s get mature, reliable, and robust, ENS will simply migrate to L2 and there will be no need to use L1 for anything but finalization.
If we ever get to this situation (and I believe we will), we won’t need to worry about multi-layer resolution and inter-layer migration plans. L2 will be simply cheaper and all applications (including ENS) will move to it–this is the picture of the future that rollups are painting for us. At some point in the future, we’ll, hopefully, have rollup networks interconnected in a bigger network so L2<->L2 data migration won’t, hopefully, be a big problem.
Again, this looks like an attempt to decide for second-level holders. This is similarly to DNS creators deciding for web application developers. Let them do whatever they want. Let them revoke subdomains if they want. Let them choose who can or cannot buy a subdomain. Let them establish a DAO if they think it would be right thing to do. It doesn’t really feel correct if ENS imposes any rules or requirements here.
If they chose an L2 that has failed, they would need to migrate to a different one. The same is true for any application that runs on this or that L2–that’s a risk that has to be taken at this moment. Should ENS mitigate this risk? Probably, yes, for second-level domains, but not for subdomains. ENS might build a tool to simplify data migration, but ENS won’t pay for gas anyway, so second-level domain owner would still have to take the risk.
I agree. But at this moment, when there are multiple rollup chains competing and it still not clear which of them is better and if or which of them ever wins the race, choosing one of them would be unfair. ENS is a common good. Every rollup chain has a community and users around it. Choosing one of them and leaving others behind a fence would be unfair.
There’s another aspect that just popped up in my head: if multiple rollup networks will eventually coexist, how would ENS resolve domains from different rollup networks? If bridging allows to bridge second-level domain to only one network then that looks like a solution. ENS would still have to have a central registry deployed to one network so other networks could get domain ownership info from it.