provider.getResolver() doesn't work with long names

[LeonmanRolls]

Ethers Version

5.6.9

Search Terms

getResolver

Describe the Problem

If a long name is given to provider.getResolver, e.g. provider.getResolver("6b86b273ff34fce19d6b804eff5a3f5747ada4eaa22f1d49c01e52ddb7875b4b.eth"), the function will return null. This address however does have a resolver set as can be seen here: https://alpha.ens.domains/profile/6b86b273ff34fce19d6b804eff5a3f5747ada4eaa22f1d49c01e52ddb7875b4b.eth/details?from=%2Fprofile%2F6b86b273ff34fce19d6b804eff5a3f5747ada4eaa22f1d49c01e52ddb7875b4b.eth.

Tried on playground.ethers.org

Code Snippet

provider.getResolver("6b86b273ff34fce19d6b804eff5a3f5747ada4eaa22f1d49c01e52ddb7875b4b.eth")

Contract ABI

No response

Errors

No response

Environment

Ethereum (mainnet/ropsten/rinkeby/goerli), Browser (Chrome, Safari, etc)

Environment (Other)

No response

[ricmoo]

The current specification for ENS names specifies that the nameprep normalization standard should be used, which limits each component to 63 bytes (after Unicode normalization).

There is currently an overhaul being taken by the ENS team to expand the specifcation, which will expand the character set (nameprep forbids many UTF-8 characters that are popular today) and relax length requirements.

You can follow along for more details on the forum. :)

[Arachnid]

Arguable! The spec says:

Labels and domains may be of any length, but for compatibility with legacy DNS, it is recommended that labels be restricted to no more than 64 characters each, and complete ENS names to no more than 255 characters. For the same reason, it is recommended that labels do not start or end with hyphens, or start with digits.

It certainly wasn't my intention to limit names to 63 characters via nameprep. :)

[ricmoo]

@Arachnid I have a minor version coming up, is there a new official recommendation for label lengths? :)

And with the upcoming off-chain DNSSEC registrar, I won’t want to break DNS compatibility.

But if you think if makes sense, I can make the change, I just don’t want to allow any name which may become invalid with any new upcoming normalization.

[Arachnid]

I have a minor version coming up, is there a new official recommendation for label lengths? :)

There's no maximum label length - so that check should simply be omitted. We're not planning to introduce a length limit with the new normalisation function.

[ricmoo]

By the way, for future readers, here is the link to the part of the IDNA specification that limits lengths to 63 or fewer characters: RFC-5891 Section4.2.4.

But this limit will be lifted in v5.7 of ethers.

[ricmoo]

The new ENS specification has been adopted in v5.7.0.

Try it out and let me know if you still have any problems. :)