Both ideas have received a significant amount of engagement in their respective threads.
While some details still need to be settled (for example, pricing and the initial mint process), I believe it is time for the community to decide which service provider the Pyth DAO should selected for finalizing and executing the launch of Pyth-branded domains.
Today, the following off-chain temperature check poll is launched:
Which service provider should be selected for launching Pyth-branded domains?
Voting starts today (Wednesday, May 29) and will last for one full week (ending on EOD Wednesday, 5th June UTC time).
Only forum members at a trust level 1 (basic user) will be able to vote — if you’re currently at trust level 0 (new user), as you progress and reach level 1 you will be able to vote on this poll.
I think it is silly to even consider a more complicated domain that will cause a ton of user errors and forgo the potential revenue stream that All Domains is offering
The simple All Domains .pyth gets my vote and it should get everyone’s
Bonfida can do .oyth too plus you also get all the .sol partnerships in one. .sol works with multiple evm networks, and is fully evm compatible so for pyth which is multichain it makes the most sense to go with a provider who expands .pyth wide as possible. Bonfida also isn’t predatory, so they only work with other tld providers when the other tlds provider agrees which is very important for working with icann in the future, assuming pyth would like the pyth tld.
Honestly, I only need a main domain name .sol, which is my core identity and payment account in the Solana ecosystem. Additionally, I am open to using .pyth.sol as a subdomain to show support for the projects I am interested in.
A while ago I wrote this piece for the Bonfida blog, and tldr the problem with custom tlds is that it’s much harder to integrate within existing systems, especially the web2 ones. It just seems like common sense to me that asking for the resolution of just the .sol domains and subdomains is a much more straightforward ask for existing implementations. This is why Brave effortlessly integrated .sol without compromising the safety of their resolution code (.sol resolution is sandboxed to .sol). On top of that, maintaining our integration is effortless for us and for them : we don’t need to reach out to them anytime we add support for a new TLD.
This means that there is just a much higher chance in the long run that pyth.sol subdomains will outlast .pyth IMO (even putting aside the fact that .sol is more mature).
In the long term as SNS continues to grow we want to be able to ask IANA (the central authority on DNS) to reserve .sol, so that we can guarantee no future interference. Having one TLD gives us a unified pool of users, ie we maximize our bargaining chips. As the second on-chain name service (only behind ENS for now), we have good chances of making that happen.
This is more of a subjective opinion: having a .sol at the end just signifies to anyone that this information is stored and verifiable on the Solana blockchain, which is relevant information in our cross-chain reality (Pyth is a cross-chain product and community).
On all Solana web3 apps, the .sol can be truncated on the UI and remain implied (the point of this poll is to avoid collisions, ie there won’t be a an Alldomains .pyth if pyth.sol is chosen)
Based. Definitely makes future proofing a lot easier. The “aesthetics argument” is also valid in that .pyth looks cleaner etc and perhaps a mutual victory is in flipping the onchain DNS hierarchy?
What I want to draw attention to is the TLD pool function by AllDomains, which was also suggested in the proposal. In short, this is a way for the community to generate revenue. The PYTH DAO can use this TLD pool together with their community members. This means, that the PYTH DAOandthe community itself would generate income with every .pyth domain registration. A good way to grow the pie together!
What do you base this statement on? It may be that Bonfida was well funded, but that doesn’t mean that AllDomains is fragile. Personally, I think it’s wrong to talk about finances from the outside, neither of AllDomains nor of Bonfida. But if you really want to talk about numbers, AllDomains has achieved a lot more with what it has in comparison. Can you tell me what you mean by socially fragile?
