IDEA: allow contract addressing by ENS instead of conract address


#1

From ether-router manual:

Allows you to have a contract with a stable address, but fully controllable and upgradeable behavior.

It looks like a nasty workaround for deeper problem in ethereum architecture, isn’t it?

Guys, we should stop use ethereum addresses as a public ids for mutable entities! We have ENS for that.
It should be possible to address a contract (or even contract+function callpoint) by ENS name.

I know, it requires low-level ENS integration into ethereum core and there are challenges here, but now I am asking you just about the idea.

Does it make sense?
What do you think?


UseCases for account abstraction
#2

It were objections, that ENS lookup may be prohibitive high.
I would suggest to introduce a global ENS resolution cache for that updated by resolver.