Yes, Cordn is designed the way it is to allow exactly this: a leader or preferred coordinator per group that keeps everything in order and avoids races that might occur when multiple sources have competing or out‑of‑order commits. It isn’t implemented yet, but it will be, we haven’t put much work into it so far because it’s an advanced feature that only power users will need, and we wanted to polish the UI/UX first. It will definitely come. But make it work reliable and have a good UX semeed what users request the most

Thanks guys!

Thanks :) so do you want one?

It is just a nip05 at cordn.net. Anyone can already just use their nip05 (e.g https://cordn.net/p/[email protected] ) but if you have one at cordn.net or the host where the app is living it will try to resolve from the host domain, that's why you can have a name without the nip05 domain part

Thank you guys!

Great article! really interesting

Indeed. Will ship this in the next patch

Yes, MLS is very complex to implement in a "decentralized" way. The bet we’re making is to make coordinators very easy to run and switch, just one at a time to avoid out of order messages, that’s the rule. For example, @sandwich made a coordinator that can run in a browser tab, and it worked reasonably well even in its early version.

It is MLS, just transported differently. It uses coordinators, which are just as dumb, or even dumber than, relays these days, for the ordering of messages (MLS requires strong ordering, which is why Marmot struggles so hard to work properly). Nostr relays transport messages between coordinators and clients using CVM, so everything is ephemeral on relays. It uses Nostr keys for identities, just like Marmot.

Cordn and Marmot are not compatible (though they could be), since MLS is such a complex protocol. Given their different requirements, they would need to agree on certain parts that they currently don’t. Happy to keep clearing doubts any time. The @Gzuuus article explains this very accurately.