SNS vs. ENS
How Sonic Name Service differs from Ethereum Name Service
While SNS and ENS share the same vision — decentralized identity and naming — their architectures diverge significantly to meet the evolving demands of high-performance L2s and modern dApps.
This page breaks down the technical and practical differences between SNS (Sonic Name Service) and ENS (Ethereum Name Service).
🔧 Architecture Comparison
Feature
ENS
SNS
Domain Representation
ERC721 NFTs
ERC721 NFTs
Storage Structure
Multiple contracts (ENS Registry, Resolver, Registrar)
Modular contracts with centralized Ledger for packed metadata — drastically reduces gas and storage via efficient bit-level encoding
Metadata
Mostly static, rendered off-chain
Fully dynamic, rendered via on-chain state + MetadataRenderer
Subdomain Ownership
Full ownership of subdomains
Full ownership of subdomains + Root domain owner assigns users
Fee Routing
Hardcoded per contract
Controlled via FeeController (upgradable)
Blacklist / Reserved Names
Not enforced at core level
Controlled via ListController
Referral System
Not natively supported
Built-in multi-level referral logic (up to 3 levels)
Reseller Support
None
Native ResellersHub with metadata, payouts, and commission tracking
Claiming Revenue
No fee redistribution
SNS token holders can claim protocol revenue via RevenueDistributor
⚡ Performance & Cost
Feature
ENS
SNS
Chain
Ethereum mainnet
Sonic (ultra-low fees, ultra-high speed)
Calldata Size
Higher (e.g., .eth vs .s)
Smaller (.s TLD = fewer bytes)
Gas Costs
High (due to Ethereum L1)
Minimal (optimized for Sonic)
🧱 Composability
Category
ENS
SNS
Upgradeable Core Modules
Limited
Modular, upgradeable via roles
Custom Resolvers
Supported
Planned via Pointer system (standard & subgraph)
DAO Integration
Optional, external
Core to revenue distribution and governance
Protocol Incentives
Mostly organic adoption
Built-in rewards for builders, referrers, resellers
🔐 Security & Control
Feature
ENS
SNS
Ownership Model
NFT-based
NFT-based
Expiration & Grace Period
Yes
Yes (customizable via Ledger)
Permission Roles
Limited (mostly admin)
Granular (AGENT_ROLE, BALANCE_MANAGER, etc.)
Reentrancy Protections
Varies by resolver
All modules protected (e.g., claim, receiveCommission)
🏷 Ownership Model
Feature
ENS
SNS
Domain Ownership
Stored in the ENS Registry contract, not tied directly to the NFT
Directly tied to the DotS NFT — NFT owner is the domain owner
Ownership Transfer
Transferring the NFT does not update ENS Registry automatically — requires additional transactions
Transferring a DotS NFT automatically transfers domain ownership, no updates needed elsewhere
Ledger Design
Registry holds ownership info, separate from metadata/resolver
Ledger stores only metadata, not ownership — full separation for efficiency and clarity
Model Type
Coupled: Registry + NFT must stay in sync
Decoupled: DotS NFT = single source of truth for domain ownership
Summary
ENS
SNS
Mature and widely adopted on Ethereum
Fresh, modular, and optimized for L2-native applications
.eth domains with legacy compatibility
.s domains with tiny calldata and fast resolution
High gas costs limit experimentation
Built for speed, scale, and composability
Last updated
Was this helpful?