What part of ENS doesn't meet your expectations?

It wasn't designed to replace DNS, but there are an increasing number of people using it for that.

It is not always about what something is not doing, but rather the unintended (often malicious) use cases it enables without any way to prevent or mitigate.

curious what “malicious” use cases a decentralized name registry enables that dns doesn’t?

[cricket tunes intensify]

you're focusing on the first part (what it enables) and not the last part (without any way to mitigate)

This, for example I lost my keys or my keys were stolen

ah interesting. won’t multi sig solve this issue? create multiple keys, and have a 2/3. if you lose one, hope you don’t lose the other.

and also - there may be a way for the naming contract to use social recovery for keys.

>Human-readable names can potentially be pseudo-random

No matter how you dice it, getting humans to remember 128 bits of entropy is going to be a non-starter. Encoding those 128 bits using words doesn't really solve the problem.

I was going to argue that remembering "CorrectBatteryHorseStaple.com" is leagues easier than remembering an 128 bit number, but then I did the math and using the 20k most common english words to encode 128bits you'd need an 8 word phrase, which pretty much solidifies the point you've made.

I mean, people can recite poetry far longer, even nonsense poetry ("Twas brillig, and the slithy toves / did gyre and gimble in the wabe") so it's not impossible. But generally speaking, yeah. Nobody wants to navigate to that bit of jabberwocky instead of google.com

It does kind of make me long for the days of the HOSTS file, where anyone might alias a hard-to-remember address as something locally meaningful.

it was considered infeasible until bitcoin demonstrated that it was feasible, as zooko agreed: http://www.aaronsw.com/weblog/squarezooko

http://web.archive.org/web/20210118172102/https://squaretria...

The problem I've got with any signed, cryptographically secure replacement for DNS (including a blockchain-backed solution) is that over time names will be lost. Just like bitcoins get lost.

You need some kind of "admin access" for the system that can fix things like lost keys, at which point you might as well stick with DNS.

or you could stick with losing the names

aaronsw proposed that you could expire unrenewed names after 12 months

i forget what solution namecoin and ens use

I hadn't considered expiry. It lets lost names re-enter the pool, at least, even if not under the control of the original owner.