Proposed rules for short name reservation process


We’re considering a means to reserve short names for existing ecosystem projects, so they don’t have to compete for ownership of their own names. The below is a proposed, hopefully lightweight, process, for doing this. Our goal is to avoid a massive amount of administrative overhead; as a result, it relies heavily on the existing DNS system for determining who should own a name.

Anyone may apply to reserve a short (3-6 character) name ahead of the auction process.

Applications must reference an existing domain name, and specify the name they wish to claim. The domain must have been registered prior to January 1, 2019.

The name being claimed must be in use as a brand name - eg, as the primary way of identifying a company or product. Personal registrations will not be accepted.

The name being claimed must be either:

  1. An exact match with the existing domain ( -> foo.eth).
  2. A prefix of the existing domain, where the suffix is a noun used to disambiguate the name ( -> ujo.eth).
  3. A suffix of the existing domain, where the prefix is a noun used to disambiguate the name ( -> kickback.eth).
  4. The concatenation of the domain and TLD ( -> bitfish.eth).
  5. The name with the suffix ‘eth’ removed, for names ending in eth ( -> ass.eth).

Once the application is submitted, the owner of the domain must create a TXT record on a specific subdomain with a predetermined value to demonstrate their ownership of the name, to validate the claim.

If multiple valid claims are received for the same name, the owner of the oldest existing domain name will be awarded the name.

Short Name Auction Reservation Process - Proposed Process
Permanent Registar Proposals - Overflow Funds, Fees & Rent, 3-6 Character Auction Start
Guide to Participating in the Permanent Registrar and 3-6 Character Auction Discussions

I think you may be under estimating the complexity of what you are proposing and how to prove this statement. I hope I am wrong.

For example, under the international arbitration rules litigants are prevented from communicating with the arbitration board outside of formal procedures. In your attempt to police the service, ENS opens itself up to all kinds of pitfalls.

How is ENS prepared to define and prove “in use” and “primary”. These are questions of fact and not easily determined without rigorous tests that need to be carefully considered. That is why there is a whole body of law that specializes in just that.

I applaud everything ENS is trying to accomplish. At the same time, I will keep trying to blow the horn of caution.

If any one who views this wants background on how this part of the law works, this is a great article.


So far we have clear separation of DNS integration and .eth address where DNS integration gives the rightful domain owner to the same ENS name while .eth is more decentralised symbolising the sprit of Ethereum. I wonder giving priority of the naming rights to DNS domain owners blurs the boundary and makes the identity of .eth weaker.


What about shorter/singular versions of a current/plural name?
Like flower.eth if you own
Otherwise sign me up : )


Can you give a practical example that corresponds to a real life brand or product?

#6 => clover.eth
i lost the auction for clovers.eth a long time ago :disappointed:


Hey, I feel sorry for losing out your brand name but I personally think this should Not taken into account. The whole reason of using domain as a proof is that we can validate the rules programmatically. Once we take into account singular /plural, then we should do the same for past/present/future tenses of brand derived from verbs in all languages not just English.


ja that makes sense :+1: