Unstoppable = Unstoppable Domains, Inc
Handshake = protocol
Users on the protocol are various third party companies and individuals.

Namebase is a major USER of the Handshake blockchain, but Handshake protocol users do not need to use Namebase if they don’t want to.

This is happening in real time a I prepare this video:

Comments from Brendan on IPFS, Pins, and Unstoppable:
https://twitter.com/BrendanEich/status/1582937838173048833?t=pl5s8ZTtHjCA1lHeT_xzAQ&s=19

And I need to sneak this other tweet from Brendan 😉
https://twitter.com/brendaneich/status/1582912774975283201?s=46&t=redTQmBWhMtvTPePdyYELg

We need to first define what we are making integrations from and to.

DATA - smart contract, resolver, database, API
To client - browser, wallet

This is important because you need to ask if this is about blockchain smart contract or about resolvers / browsers.

In my mind, integrations are mainly 2 main buckets:

• Wallet addresses (using smart contract / blockchain)
• Browser clients (resolving domains as websites).

These are what turn “words” into functioning “domains”.

Handshake mainly has been focusing on using Handshake domain as websites, whereas ENS, Unstoppable, and other web3 domains are focusing on using the domain as usernames/logins/payment addresses.

To be frank, to do both is very hard and expensive.

If you want to integrate meta mask or open sea to your blockchain domains, this is done by smart contract.

What is a smart contract?
It is the “rules” for a collection of assets/data on a specific blockchain.

For Unstoppable, they have 1 smart contract on Ethereum.
That is how Opensea, for example, “pulls” the list of domains there.
https://opensea.io/collection/unstoppable-domains

You can then click “view on etherscan” and it links you to the smart contract address
(actually I can’t see on there)

For handshake, there needs to be a bridge built, using HIP005, that allows a TLD owner to put their SLDs on another blockchain.

This is then on a smart contract.

From what I know, there are 3 smart contracts on Ethereum now, all by Impervious

1) Badass.domains

2) Foreverdomains.io

3) Impervious.domain
https://opensea.io/collection/impervious-registry
Which smart contract address is:
https://etherscan.io/address/0xfeddc1448eb4480714a9942ba28a27b16caf9ce4

EACH of these smart contracts needs to make their own integrations which would convert their SLD domain name to match to the Ethereum (or whichever blockchain in other cases) so that funds or NFTs can be sent to that domain name.

So for example, Mark Smith suggesting we help Impervious for now as it is the mainstream one

https://twitter.com/marksmithio/status/1582903954496978945?s=46&t=6e3aGAv6PkUFF8r3sILmMg

There has been attempts to get the attention from the MetaMask forum to integrate Impervious domains as wallet addresses
https://community.metamask.io/t/adding-a-new-domain-register-for-readable-wallet-addresses/22437

The idea is - these integrations that need the smart contract would look up names for that asset when someone types the domain into metamask.

So - these integrations need to be setup for each “client” or end point. Meaning, if Metamask does integrate the Impervious smart contract - SLD / domain users/customers/holders would be able to send NFT and funds on metamask by typing in the domain name.

Again, this would only work for that smart contract - meaning Impervious registry domains on ethereum blockchain.

Also - maybe Metamask has an “application fee”, a contract that needs to be signed, an “integration implementation developer fee”.

It is business. It is a cost of doing business. It is how these tools often make money - they are free for users, but companies need to pay to be integrated.

This business development would need to happen for any and all integrations - and only work for the smart contract(s) that are in the “deal terms”. So maybe multiple smart contracts could be integrated at the same time.

Would this be a one time fee, a yearly fee? Or other terms? Would an NDA (non disclosure) need to be signed between the 2 parties (in our example - Metamask and Impervious)? Could the deal terms be openly shared to the Handshake community and internet at large - or would Meta Mask stipulate in the contract to not disclose the price and terms?

I do not know. This is what needs to be discussed and developed.

So that is my understanding of how smart contract integration works - for web3 domain, as well as for NFT login, etc. The smart contract needs to be “mapped” into the client (exchange, wallet, website platform)

Now, let's move on to browser integration.

So Handshake seems to be working harder and more focused on the domains working as website URLs.

If you notice when you type in most ENS or Unstoppable domains , they redirect to a smart addresss - as the content is hosted on that address. Honestly I am not clear enough to explain why.

But Handshake wants to be human readable domains on browsers - more than wallet addresss. Also many in Handshake are more bitcoiners, and want more privacy than a public address that shows all your assets publicly.

Ok - so back to browsers

The challenge is COLLISIONS - meaning - when there are 2 .coin. Or 2 .wallet - so what happens when a user types in scott.wallet - will it resolve the Handshake one, the Unstoppable One, the ENS one, the Decentraweb one, the Freename one, the ICANN one?

I’vee been on calls with browsers - and as much as I’d want to share - browsers are NOT willing/able to be transparent online about their terms. Browsers are web2, they are companies. They have investors. They have payroll. They have companies. So most ask for NDA and do not want things out in the public about these integration costs and terms.

So generally - the browsers are discussing 2 ways

Option 1 - allow the end user (the web surfer) to choose in their settings which domains they want to load on their browser - ENS, UD, HNS, ICANN only, etc.

Option 2 - the browser decides how to deal with it. And the end user has no choice - when they use this brand of web browser, and they type in a specific URL, even if there are name collisions - only the 1 naming solution this browser “made an integration deal with” will “resolve” or open.

And we are seeing Brave browser have options. And other browsers we are seeing not yet having options for the users.

Comes down to DEAL MAKING and business
What are the terms that these 2 parties are making?

Exclusivity ?
That normally costs a lot more money than non-exclusivity.

And all that jazz.

So - this discussion came up from a Youtube comment about the Unstoppable Stopping their integrations from working on .coin, and a viewer asking if Handshake can do the same thing.

It is not exactly apple and oranges.

Unstoppable Domains, Inc (notice the INC) - its a private company.
Handshake.org is a decentralized protocol - there is no company. There is no “foundation” that has all the money hin their treasury to pay.

So - this is a different scenario. And it depends on which type of integrations are made, what the technical (is it Impervious’s smart contracts to be human readable wallet addresses on meta mask? Or is it Brave browser integration)

So it is not a fully “black or white” turn off the lights for the Handshake side.
It also depends on what registry and registrar the SLD domains are on.

This is why many in the community tell users - buy your own TLD and use that. Why buy a SLD ? Buying an SLD does make you have “another point of failure. Another potential centralized company that can turn off your domain name.

But Gateway registry was always a centralized solution - there was no secret about that. Impervious is on the Etherereum blockchain , and TLDs are Marked as “ sent to a burn address” or still not yet (thus seeing if the HNS TLD owner can “rug pull you and turn off SLDs).

I still want to keep it real here - Impervious integration to metamask or other smart contract could turn off - I believe - by either side (something I ned to learn more about)

But domains in a browser, the registrar/registry couldn’t turn those off, unless they rug pull your SLD or have access to your domain settings (like current web2 registrars and registries have).

Handshake integration is more complicated. It is also depending on which kind of integration, etc.

But it is NOT like Unstoppable - which is basically ICANN in web3 for all domain it issues. It is a private company that can turn off the lights on any and all domains under its “control”.

Handshake is a TLD protocol - and each TLD owner owns the rights to do whatever they want with it. SLD owners is a bit out of scope for Handshake, as it allows the TLD owner to do what they want.

Hope this helps.

If you want to help with integrations in Handshake - this is something we definitely need to work on and may make a group around.

Also think - will you help Impervious get more smart contract integration? Will you help get more browser adoption?

Food for thought.

Tulip:
Can you answer me my question:
What if skyinclude or namebase stop supporting .mastermind domain 👀?

SkyInclude:
those are centralized registrars, so then you coulndt buy there. But each TLD can be used how that TLD owner wants - some TLD owners are putting their on SLD sales blockchains I haven’t even heard of. Many are using impervious - which is on eth - such as omen

but i still own .mastermind on HNS - and i can move the SLDs to another platform - such as what the .wallet is doing now and gettinig those customers their SLD restored on a new account.

can make a video if this is not clear?

for .mastermind, that is with Varo domains, i have videos on that.
with UD - the user has NO CHOICE
with HNS - the TLD owner can do anything, and the TLD will always live on the HNS blockchain.
SLD issuance is the choice of the TLD owner.

Tulip:
So what if tld owner refuses to support anymore just like ud

SkyInclude:
@Tulip then do not use that TLD, / do not use that company. or check if on impervious the TLD has been "locked" by sending to a burn address. each TLD is its own situation, as decentralization should be. best to own your own TLD honestly.

Tulip:
"Support" I said doesn't mean retrieving all slds. I said about integrations. What if tld owner decide to not support integrations or in case of impervious the community for some reason decide to not give integration support to a specific domain

SkyInclude:
@Tulip integration depends on the case - if it is a smart contract integration, then it is impervious smart contract SLDs only vs opening you own eth smart contract.

for browser integration - all HNS names

Tulip:
Didn't understand what said in first para. About hns integration , the thing similiar to what I said is already happening.Opera crypto browser which resolves hns is resolving .wallet of ud and not the one of hns

SkyInclude:
@Tulip i'll make a dedicated video about this - it is too hard to fi tin a youtube comment and is imprttant.