Note that [BIP 353](https://github.com/bitcoin/bips/pull/1551/commits/4f75edb2b85f55f5723e379584e52181f5f44269) addresses some reasons why it doesn't use this approach: 
>There are many existing schemes to resolve human-readable names to cryptocurrency payment instructions. Sadly, these current schemes suffer from a myriad of drawbacks, including (a) lacking succinct proofs of namespace to public key mappings, (b) revealing sender IP addresses to recipients or other intermediaries as a side-effect of payment, (c) relying on the bloated TLS Certificate Authority infrastructure, or (d) lacking open access, not allowing anyone to create a namespace mapping.

Scoresby

BIPs are by definition changes to Bitcoin (BIPS = Bitcoin Improvement Proposals).

People sometimes mention 'Bitcoin ossification,' and I'm not 100% on it, but this article looks like it's saying the opposite. What do you think?

jakoyoh629

This BIP proposes a standardized way for Bitcoin wallets and related software to retrieve contact and payment information using a simple HTTPS GET request to a .well-known endpoint. Inspired by the Lightning Address specification, this mechanism supports on-chain, off-chain, and identity metadata lookups, enabling richer identity-based interoperability in the Bitcoin ecosystem.

While  BIP 353 proposes using DNS, this draft BIP is suggesting using 

 endpoints. So it sounds like it's more or less creating NIP-05's for Bitcoin wallets. You could self-host it on your own domain, so it wouldn't suffer some of the 

 layout because there are so many ways to interpret email-looking things now.

There's a prototype server you can check out here: 

https://paysats.online/

bitcoin

**An alternative to BIP 353**

> This BIP proposes a standardized way for Bitcoin wallets and related software to retrieve contact and payment information using a simple HTTPS GET request to a .well-known endpoint. Inspired by the Lightning Address specification, this mechanism supports on-chain, off-chain, and identity metadata lookups, enabling richer identity-based interoperability in the Bitcoin ecosystem.

While  BIP 353 proposes using DNS, this draft BIP is suggesting using `.well-known` endpoints. So it sounds like it's more or less creating NIP-05's for Bitcoin wallets. You could self-host it on your own domain, so it wouldn't suffer some of the [man-in-the-middle risk](https://stacker.news/items/1044708/r/Scoresby?commentId=1044753) of BIP353. 

@Murch [suggested](https://groups.google.com/g/bitcoindev/c/lfMIFPcOz7M/m/iEtbK2E-AwAJ) avoiding the `name@domain` layout because there are so many ways to interpret email-looking things now.

There's a prototype server you can check out here: https://paysats.online/