I’ve been in the IT industry for more than 15 years, came across ICP a week ago and got stunned by the technology for it solves real world pain points “Firewall less/ Server less is too good”. In short sold my all of my worthless crypto for ICP
My suggestion is that dfinity team should apply for .ICP to ICANN as a root domain and let the world know that the true web3 has arrived. Make sense right? since Internet Computer Protocol is reinventing the internet then .ICP should be it’s root domain.
I couldn’t agree more, we need an ecosystem-wide TLD and we need to revive the IC Naming System Technical Working Group which was making important progress last year but was put on pause in March.
A few points:
The IC is a perfect platform for implementing a naming system both for the decentralized collaborative management & assignment of names and for providing a globally distributed tamper-proof root directory service;
Every developer and many users of the IC know how awkward and deficient the current scheme of using the canister id as the service access name is. It’s like being stuck with using IP addresses as the only way of addressing web hosts and web services in web2;
The above point applies just as much to internal IC canister addressing as it does to external requests into the IC from outside e.g. how would you address a load-balancing cluster of identical canisters distributed across multiple subnets in a distributed messaging protocol?
Dfinity does need to take the lead on requesting a dedicated TLD such as “.icp”, it won’t fly if some IC community members submit a proposal to ICANN. The process could take a long while and expect roadblocks and delays along the way. So the sooner we organise and begin the submission process, the more likely a timely outcome.
@Kepler@domwoe can we get an update on any movement on the Working Group and any thoughts on this?
Hi @icarus and @PoS, an Internet Computer naming system is still on top of our minds. More then just a registry of names, the goal is to come up with practical standards that are encouraging for Top-level Domain Providers to operate on the Internet Computer, as well as, for developers to use the naming system in their applications (this could be both off-chain but also inside their canisters).
Topics like governance, resiliency of domain name ownership in the case of a Top-level Domain provider going out of business, the ability to completely own the records of a domain name and web2 compatibility are all important aspects of the naming system. The draft of the governance document and specification are the initial steps in that direction.
To be clear, the recently released ICP roadmap does not yet include the naming system, however, there are still ongoing discussions about CNS. I’ll make sure to keep you updated on any new developments. Moreover, the next ICANN gTLD round is not yet open, it is expected to open in 2025 at the earliest, which gives us some time to drive alignment.
Totally agree. Moreover, domain names have been actively explored in the blockchain industry, such as ENS on Ethereum and Runes by Atomics. I believe that when ICP’s top-level domain name is launched, the entire industry will definitely praise it.
I think our top-level root domain name should not only have ICP, but also ic. IC
can be used by DAO and corporate users, and ICP can be used by individual users.
This is just a personal idea, but both ICP and IC are very important, because in the next three years we may have to face competition from AO and AR
