I don't know what alex@gleasonator.com@mostr.pub means. Explain in English what that is supposed to signify.
nostr:npub180cvv07tjdrrgpa0j7j7tmnyl2yr6yr7l8j4s3evf6u64th6gkwsyjh6w6 nostr:npub1acg6thl5psv62405rljzkj8spesceyfz2c32udakc2ak0dmvfeyse9p35c nostr:npub108pv4cg5ag52nq082kd5leu9ffrn2gdg6g4xdwatn73y36uzplmq9uyev6
Is there an obvious reason why `@` is not allowed in the local part of a `nip05` key? It would be nice to have proxied names like `alex@gleasonator.com@mostr.pub` instead of `alex_at_gleasonator.com@mostr.pub`. Assuming it's not allowed in the domain part, there should be no ambiguity in how to look that up.
Discussion
Because AFAICT by the example, what is desired to be expressed is Alex is associated with gleasonator.com and also associated with mostr.pub. Which to me means that Alex could wish to have two different NIP-05 addresses. Which isn't currently a supported thing.
alex@gleasonator.com@mostr.pub -> look up pubkey at https://mostr.pub/.well-known/nostr.json?name=alex@gleasonator.com
Alex IS associated with both domains, but there is only one NIP-05 identity here. Is there really an issue with having more @ signs? If he wanted to go by `@lex_gle@son@nostr.com` would it be any harder to look up than `alex_gleason@nostr.com`?
Of course I don't care about giving Alex his leet hacker NIP-05. I am wondering how we might proxy NIP-05 identities like Alex did for events with NIP-48. Allowing for @ signs would be unconventional, but seems like the simplest way to do it. Whether it is reasonable is another question.