Also posted on Nick’s thread here: Allowing the DAO to manually issue .eth 2LDs, including 1- and 2- character ones - #11 by clowes.eth
To be clear, you want l2.eth to be owned through a multisig? I think the proposed signers on that multisig would be an important consideration as part of this temp check… Once owned, setting the resolver etc would not need to come back to the DAO as a separate executable - it would be the responsibility of the signers on that multisig…
That said, there’s an argument for the DAO wallet owning the name itself IMO.
Setting the resolver would require an executable, but realistically that shouldn’t need to be changed often. We also have the ENS Security Council providing an additional level of security coverage. Why go to the effort of establishing a new multisig?
This isn’t providing a short name to a private company with a trademark, but rather provisioning a name for utilisation as a chain data discovery mechanism. In my opinion this should be considered separately to Nick’s more generalised Temp Check. An ownership structure like that may be more palatable to delegates…
I think this is a first of its kind proposal for utilising this power for a name registration.
I’m not sure I follow your second suggestion.
This is a discoverability mechanism. Realistically it’s going to be technical implementors that use it not normies.
It is however quite a constrained term. What about Layer 3 chains? Something more generic may be more appropriate.
It would be .base.l2.eth and .zksync.l2.eth but your point still stands.
My understanding is that the intention is to standardize how the data is stored on chain such that wallet providers can fetch it and know how to read it. Then they can display it how they choose, which hopefully is user friendly…
The actual address format, I agree, is a little burdensome. But I guess that’s separate to this proposal and part of the 7828 conversation. I’m not sure that I have a suggestion for a better format.
TL;DR
I think this is a great idea. Is l2.eth the correct name?