FYI, this cleared up my confusion: Nintendo Incident: Feedback Summary and Open Questions
It really was a boundary node.
A1. Further there are only 6 boundary nodes (https://dashboard.internetcomputer.org/).
A2. Additionally the claim as made by others in this forum is that there is anecdotal evidence that ALL boundary nodes are currently provided by dfinity… ( unless there is a affirmative rejection of this claim).
Adding A1 & A2 an astute observer would infer that that the DCMA notice was actually served to Dfinity. Please feel free to correct this inference.
2 Likes
I assume this wouldn’t affect canister calls addressing a principal using dfx or smth?
1 Like
It would, all calls to canisters would be forced to use DNS. dfx would need to use an endpoint with a DNS domain name.