I would go with something like .p2p or .peer instead of dweb
For me, peer (p2p) imply some communication with specific peers, like in conferencing, but in this case, you mean to communicate with a network of peers and you probably don't care which "peer" would answer your request.
"dweb" looks a bit like "dweeb". Also, I think that this special-use domain name would be used for more than just web-related stuff, no? For example, tor and i2p are used for IRC, and there's also file-sharing protocols like bittorrent which are usually not considered to be part of the "web". I think .p2p is a better umbrella term. Just my two cents.
Peer-to-peer (P2P) computing or networking is a distributed application architecture that partitions tasks or workloads between peers. Peers are equally privileged, equipotent participants in the application. They are said to form a peer-to-peer network of nodes.
Skype or other teleconferencing software is only P2P in this sense you're describing because it is used for private streams, so there is not really need or incentive for outsiders to "seed" someone else's skype call. Compare that to public live-streaming software like Peertube, which is also called peer-to-peer.
I think the average person associates the word "P2P" with bittorrent, which IPFS is pretty similar to.
Also, It can't hurt to ask for multiple special-use domain names, can it?
There is an interesting precedent of Tor project registering Special-Use Domain Name .onion:
I'd like to open a discussion on feasibility of following that example and creating
Main motivation is improved UX and improved migration path:
.dwebcould become the
www.for the DWeb, eg:
(approach being discussed for go-ipfs)
(eg. mark it as Secure Context – .onion example, or enable experimental p2p APIs)
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: