Pretty interesting! I find these attempts to remake IRC fairly intriguing. I've read your description, and it's really cool how you've re-invented server-to-server routing. Unfortunately, it wasn't clear how services operate, though. Just a couple thoughts:

1. Is there still a benefit to having more than one server? My understanding is that IRC networks had multiple servers partially because because having >50k open network sockets was difficult on 1995-era UNIX-like operating systems. That's not really a problem anymore. I guess multiple servers is a way to achieve load-balancing and fault-tolerance for servers going down, though. But then again, the services database still has to exist somewhere, right? That's probably still a single point of failure?

2. From a user perspective, an IRC replacement ought to compete with Discord. That means support for posting images and videos, audio/video chat, offline history, easy switching between desktop and phone, deep and granular admin controls, etc. I'd love for there to be an open source & open protocol option here, but I'm terrified to even imagine an RFC that implements all of this in a way that works in practice.