Base

Why don't ENS names work for sending with MetaMask Chrome extension on Base?

https://docs.ens.domains/dapp-developer-guide/ens-l2-offchain#l2-resolver

cc/ @greg

I like baking /goodbread and building apps on web3 protocols. DevRel @ ENS Labs. gregskril.com

Building /bright-moments - minting onchain art IRL | /purple #15 | FID 129 #magikarp

Rome, Metropolitan City of Rome Capital, Italy

@greg This is a good example of where ENS needs to be way more focused on execution vs. standards. Otherwise apps that make it easy to pay people will opt out of using ENS. :)

If you mean, why aren’t we using the ethereum address? Account abstraction. Although I’m working on a default standard that would allow this to be set for EoAs.

Building ENS since forever.

Interested in identity, cryptography, climbing, health.

@base builder #001; onchain cities w/ OAK & city3

If the address isn’t an EoA we can’t guarantee the account exists on the L2. If it is an EoA though we could create a default address record that is signed by the EoA (guaranteeing it’s not an SCA) allowing it to be a fallback for all evm-based records. We could also do the same for a primary ens name default.

Yes we are, but its a massive in flux problem that we internally refer to as the “l2 iceberg”

Thinking about it now, we can just as easily allow defaults for SCW, but the user just needs to be deterministically deploying their SCW across different chains. And that's more a UX thing for wallets and SCWs to allow/enforce

I feel like it's a step backwards to just solve this for EOAs. are you thinking about how to solve this for SCWs?