This doesn't require a new syntax: When the wallet is resolving user.rollup.eth, the standard resolution process should be resolve to resolve the way you described: resolve rollup.eth to get a chain identifier and user.rollup.eth to get an address.

This approach also allows user.rollup.eth to override this behavior by setting a record for their own preferred chain identifier to use when their ENS name is resolved. *.rollup.eth names will likely never override this, but I'd expect almost every user.eth to want to receive funds on some chain that isn't L1.

I don't think any of these fallbacks should be our target behavior. Users should be able to control on which chain assets sent to their ENS name arrive. I think ENS experts should lead the way on this resolution process via an ENSIP.

In the below examples, isn't the user also just <address> | <ens-name>?

In the examples below it's indeed an but if I understand correctly it could also use an ens-subdomain such as user@arbitrum.eth which might mean something different from user.eth@arbitrum.eth.

The former would resolve user locally on arbitrum, and the latter (being a fully-qualified name) would resolve user.eth on L1. Is that not the intention?

This actually opens up a very big issue that I believe it’s not discussed here: in theory, user should beuser across the whole Ethereum ecosystem at least, but in fact there are many Domain Name Services beyond ENS that are local to some L2s or even just one.

For example, I have jaack.eth, and also registered jaack.avax on Avalanche C-Chain and jaack.blast on Blast.

First, I believe we should consider ENS as the ‘main router’ for DNS resolutions, because it’s stated as a requirement in the ERC. Since this is the case, then resolution should be global across Ethereum, including rollups. So user needs to be `user.eth on any chain, especially considering that this ERC would likely be implemented around the time that Namechain will be at least on testnet, so the ENS registry is itself on a ‘service’ L2.

@yoavw the case where an address is local only to its chain is the one where most addresses owned by users are smart wallets / accounts that are not the same across chains (unlike EOAs, that have the same pubkey / privkey across any EVM).

SLIPs aren't am approved external resource. You'll need to do one of:

• remove the reference
• duplicate the information here or in assets/
• follow EIP-5757 to get SLIPs allowed

solved c33c60f