I'm not a believer of a limited DNS

Right now you can create a public ID and that is your domain name, this is nice because it prevents domain name squatting, 1+ for this solution. On the other hand I think it limits what we can actually do, with our domain names. For instance if I in the future register public ID “crypto”, I would be able to register names like:

safe://crypto.cat or safe://crypto.dog, but if someone else wish to register safe://crypto.money they can’t and they get an error. Even worst if they registered the public ID “crypto” after I did, it’s seen as a valid option, which is a little deceptive, because no matter what they’ll never be able to register/upload an “crypto” domain. Personally i think it’s a waste to go down this path, because on the current internet many domain names are possible.

The current setup creates three problems

  • People have to create a new account through launcher, because if they are the second to use public ID “crypto”, they can’t use the domain name.
  • People have to create a another domain name, because they are not warned that they cannot use public ID “crypto”
  • If the two processes above cost people money, they might get angry maybe…

There could be a few solution to this problem, for instance if you register a public ID, instead of getting an error, the second person gets a message to buy the “crypto” domain that they want to use. If I’m not using safe://crypto.money why should someone else not be able to use it? This is just one option, but I think it’s better than letting people create another launcher ID & public ID, with a cost attached to it al. Incase people feel that the first person to register the public ID, should not get a SAFEcoin, the SAFEcoin could be recycled when the second person wants to register a same public ID.

In the example above I foolishly assume that .safenet will eventually become whatever the user choose too…

1 Like

I strongly suspect another DNS service will wrap the existing one in safe net.

The current names give a unique address on the network, much like an IP address does outside of safe network. Out of the box, we just get a friendlier format on safe net.

So, I expect google.safe may resolve to google12890.safenet or some such. The current safe net names will still be useful to memorise (better than IP addresses), but I suspect a friendlier names will be provided by this additional resolution layer.

Just my speculation of course!

Didn’t someone propose a form of “pet names”, a kind of user built DNS that people could subscribe to the one that suits them and allows them to assign pet names themselves locally

1 Like

let me link you to the resource: http://petnamesystem.smacz.safenet/ (@smacz when you have some spare time you could upload the site again …? :smiley: … got lost temporary with the whipe)

as an alternative here is an explanation inside the forum :wink:


Sorry I was behind with this one, with the new version of the Test Client there is a message that the public ID is already taken, that’s good.
Public ID Error
Public ID is already taken.

Let’s say I have the public ID “pets” what’s bad is that if someone else would want to register a domain name with “pets” they can’t. On the current internet there is: pets.com, but also pets.love

Can’t we atleast let the first person who took the public ID sell/give the extensions to other people? if registering crypto.cat or crypto.com, is impossible because crypto.bobsmokesweedeveryday was the first with the public ID “crypto”, it might be strange…

In the example above crypto.bobsmokesweedeveryday can be a weedshop, but should that limit crypto.cat a well known online app to not be able to register crypto.cat? To be honest I think more should be possible on the SAFE Network.

If I understand the “pet” name system then google the company might have accept “googlethecompany1234” as their main public ID

Then those who love google.com can subscribe to a pet name curator that has google pointing to “googlethecompany1234”

So when you type “google” into the browser you are given “googlethecompany1234” web page.


I also stronly disbelieve in these limited names. I prefer the other way around, a cryptokey publicly visible (but e.g. hidable) and then as a sub-object of that a dns name. Similar as to FreenetProject holds their Data in Keys, and following the keys are the object names.

On named data networks why would anyone need a limited system such as a dns, if you can simulate and authenticate/proof the dns entry with a cryptokey and there could be a multitude of ‘same’ “mycooltld” all differentiated and authenticated (differentiated/distinguished) by the cryptokey component that actually is the master key in the chain of objects.

Then we would all steer clear from name grabbing and all sorts of stupid old-world problems such as intellectual property and registering mere letters words or even numbers and all that foolishness.

we dont need a dns name but we need a distinguishable (cryptically safe and individual) name for a object. And as far as I understand the core ideas of Safenet, we do already have those crypto keys for all and every object.

Safenet should simply show that cryptokey component part of an objects address infront of the logical parts such as ‘dns’ entry and all the others. Then you can have endless google.safenet but they all differ via the actual crypto key.

I think it is vital to show these cryptologically safe parts of the object names, maybe not for the novice, but if you want to have security you cannot make it too simple.


@neo You…kinda got it backwards.

Think of a phone book, you have 500 "John Smith"s. You gotta search for the John Smith that you want.

Now think of your own personal address book. You have “Dr. Smith”, “Cousin John”, and “Johnathan S.” You have denotated each of them as you know them. Publicly they’re all “John Smith”, but you know which is which.

To address your specific example: Google the Company would have their DNS as:

(Public) Nickname: google.com
Key: 54ab68cb6aab7b88cd9e9ff83762

Those who love google.com can put in their own address book :

Petname: google
Key: 54ab68cb6aab7b88cd9e9ff83762

So when you type “google” into the browser:

If "google" is in your personal address book:
    Key: 54ab68cb6aab7b88cd9e9ff83762

If "google" is _not_ in your personal address book:


Absolute/Unique Navigation

Since there is no globally unique human-memorable addresses in the Petname System, URLs/URIs will be deprecated. They will be replaced with a Key input to reference unique data. This will be used sparingly, but it is still relevant in order to be able to navigate to a specific site without any digital Referral. No App developer can use anything other than Keys to reference any other data on the SAFE Network.

This Key input cannot accept Nicknames as Keys. Even though Nicknames have the ability to be indexed into a searchable database, they are not meant to be an absolute resolver because they lack the attribute of being globally unique. While a search engine for Nicknames is not included in this proposal, it is certainly an application that this proposal facilitates.

This gives the users sole control over the naming scheme.

EDIT: What you described is GNUNet, or GNUNames, or GNUsomething: similar, but not quite the same. More centralized.

1 Like