[TEP-81] Establishing a Domain Name System for the TON Blockchain

The TON Enhancement Proposal 81 (TEP-81) introduces the TON Domain Name System (DNS), a pivotal innovation aimed at transforming human-readable domain names into addresses usable within the TON ecosystem. This active proposal, crafted by EmelyanenkoK and Tolya and introduced on June 25, 2022, delineates the framework for a service that seamlessly translates domain names into TON smart contract addresses, ADNL addresses, and more, thereby enhancing user accessibility and interaction within the network.

Overview of the TON DNS Standard

TON DNS leverages familiar domain name structures, enabling entities within the TON Network to utilize easily recognizable identifiers instead of complex address formats. This system not only improves the user experience but also fosters a more intuitive interaction with various TON services and applications.

Key Features of TON DNS

  • Domain Name Format: Utilizes UTF-8 encoded strings, with a maximum length of 126 bytes, structured in a conventional format separated by dots (e.g., test.ton).
  • Case Insensitivity: Although technically case-sensitive, domain names are processed in lowercase to ensure consistency and avoid confusion.
  • Domain Resolution Process: Employs the dnsresolve get-method to translate domain names into relevant addresses or information, with the process beginning at the root DNS smart contract identified through the TON Blockchain configuration.

Comparative Analysis with EIP-137 (Ethereum Name Service)

Feature TEP-81 (TON) EIP-137 (Ethereum Name Service)
Resolution Mechanism Utilizes dnsresolve get-method Utilizes resolver contracts
Domain Name Limit Up to 126 bytes, UTF-8 encoded Not explicitly limited, normalized to ENS requirements
Internal Representation Reverse-order concatenation with null characters Normalized using UTS #46
First-Level Domain Initially restricted to .ton Open, with .eth as primary namespace
Case Sensitivity Processed in lowercase Normalized to NFC and case-folded

Advantages and Challenges


  • Enhanced Accessibility: By replacing complex addresses with readable domain names, TON DNS significantly improves the accessibility and usability of the TON ecosystem.
  • Standardization: Provides a uniform system for domain name resolution across the TON Network, facilitating interoperability among services and applications.


  • Domain Name Squatting: The potential for domain squatting exists, as users may register popular domain names for resale, although the annual renewal requirement may mitigate this to some extent.
  • Internationalization: While supporting UTF-8 allows for a broad range of characters, the exclusion of certain ranges and the decision to process domains in lowercase aim to prevent phishing but may limit the expression of domain names.


TEP-81 marks a significant step forward in making the TON Blockchain more accessible and user-friendly by introducing a standardized domain name system akin to traditional DNS on the internet. Through TON DNS, the proposal paves the way for a more interconnected and easily navigable TON ecosystem, enhancing the overall user experience while maintaining a structured approach to domain name resolution. As the TON ecosystem continues to evolve, the implementation of TON DNS will undoubtedly play a crucial role in its growth and adoption.

The TEP-81 proposal introduces a comprehensive standard for the TON DNS system, which aims to simplify the process of mapping human-readable domain names to various TON network addresses. This initiative is crucial for enhancing the usability and accessibility of the TON ecosystem, making it easier for users to interact with smart contracts, services, and other resources without needing to manage or remember complex addresses.

Professional Insight:

The TON DNS standard signifies a pivotal advancement towards making blockchain technology more accessible and user-friendly. By adopting a familiar domain name system similar to the internet’s DNS, TON enables users to easily connect with blockchain resources, thereby lowering the entry barrier for non-technical users. Furthermore, the detailed specification ensures that the system is robust, secure, and capable of supporting a wide range of applications and services.

Technical Considerations:

  1. Human-Readable Domain Names:

    • The adoption of UTF-8 encoded string domains, with a structured format and restrictions on characters, ensures consistency and prevents confusion. However, the emphasis on lowercase to achieve case-insensitivity might necessitate clear guidelines for dApp developers and users to prevent any inadvertent errors or misunderstandings.
  2. Security and Privacy:

    • The proposal’s approach to resolving domain names, including the use of internal representations and encrypted communication, highlights a commitment to security and privacy. Nonetheless, it would be beneficial to explore further measures to safeguard against potential DNS spoofing or phishing attacks within the TON ecosystem.
  3. Scalability and Performance:

    • TON DNS’s design, which involves root and resolver smart contracts, seems scalable and capable of handling a large number of domain name queries. However, considerations should be made regarding the potential for congestion or delays, especially with the reliance on smart contracts for domain resolution. Optimizations or fallback mechanisms could be necessary to maintain high performance.

Professional Questions:

  1. Domain Name Disputes and Governance:

    • How does TON DNS propose to handle disputes over domain names, especially in cases of trademark infringement or malicious registrations? Is there a governance model or dispute resolution process in place to address these issues?
  2. Domain Name Renewal and Ownership Loss:

    • The proposal mandates annual domain name renewals to prevent permanent loss of domains due to inaccessible wallets. Could there be a mechanism to recover domains if the original owner loses access to their wallet, or is there a risk of losing valuable domain names permanently?
  3. Support for Internationalized Domain Names (IDNs):

    • While the proposal currently restricts domain names to ASCII to prevent look-alike domains, is there any consideration for supporting internationalized domain names in the future? This could be crucial for broader adoption of TON DNS across different languages and regions.
  4. Integration with Existing Internet DNS:

    • Has there been any consideration for how TON DNS might interoperate or integrate with the existing internet DNS system? Such integration could facilitate smoother transitions between traditional web services and decentralized applications on the TON network.

In summary, the TON DNS standard is a forward-thinking proposal that addresses a key need within the blockchain ecosystem for user-friendly domain names. Its successful implementation could significantly enhance the user experience and foster greater adoption of TON-based applications and services. Moving forward, addressing the outlined questions and considerations will be essential in ensuring the resilience, security, and inclusivity of the TON DNS system.