Wouldn’t you still need dns to connect to the relays?
Discussion
I am waiting for the moment relays become just pubkeys (still need some IP somewhere, though).
It doesn't seem that complicated to achieve with IP addresses listed in a nip65-like event for relays and pubkey support in nip65 events.
I doubt clients would see implementing it as a priority.
It would be a fun project to make a PR for it in 20+ clients.
Ppl are going to hate this, but if you want a censorship resistant means of mapping ip’s to pubkeys or vanity names, I can tell think of a distributed ledger that can handle that…
There's no need to map ips to pubkeys, just pubkeys to ips. And pubkey to IP doesn't need a ledger. There is no need for a globally-synchronized naming structure.
But how do you solve the cold start issue? If all I have is a pubkey, how do I find the corresponding ip?
In a world where people write that data on chain, it becomes trivially easy to find and impossible to censor
Yeah, but chain operations become extremely expensive over time.
> If all I have is a pubkey, how do I find the corresponding IP?
There are many ways, but you basically would have a boostrap IP that can download NIP-65-like events of other relays. We could even use WoT to ask your friend's client to become the Bootstrap relay. Once you have a list of available options saved locally, you can easily get updated records by just querying a few of them. And if they go offline, you update the list with new ones. As long as you know the IP of a single relay, you can get all the others.
Do you think there’s any future for a decentralized dns-like protocol for unique vanity names?
