ICANN's board is sending mixed signals about the new gTLD program, but it appears they are ready to approve the next round at their 76th public meeting in Mexico next month.



The board will approve the GNSO's policy recommendations incrementally, and a few sticking points will need approval at a later date. While many of the recommendations will be approved at ICANN 76, a small subset will be deferred for future consideration.

The board seems to be leaning towards "Option 2" from Org's Operational Design Assessment, which would be quicker and cheaper than the five-year slog originally envisioned by ODA. Chair Tripti Sinha wrote that the board is asking ICANN Org for more detail on financing the steps in the ODA and developing a variation of Option 2 to reduce manual processing and resolve critical policy issues like closed generics.

Closed generics were a topic of discussion due to the possibility of one company keeping all domains in a generic-term gTLD to themselves. Although there was no community consensus recommendation on this issue, an agreement was made that closed generics should only be allowed if they serve the global public interest. However, talks between the GNSO Council and Governmental Advisory Committee stalled as they failed to agree on what "generic" and "global public interest" actually mean.

Tripti Sinha is an expert in the field of generic top-level domains (gTLDs) and has been closely monitoring the process of introducing new gTLDs. She believes that the decision-making process regarding the introduction of new gTLDs will be incremental rather than a one-time event.

According to Sinha, the introduction of new gTLDs requires careful consideration and evaluation of various factors such as market demand, potential impact on existing domains, and technical feasibility. She anticipates that decisions on new gTLDs will be made gradually, with each potential domain extension being thoroughly assessed before its approval.

Sinha emphasizes the importance of maintaining the stability and reliability of the domain name system (DNS) throughout the process. Incremental decision-making allows for a more measured approach, ensuring that any new gTLDs are introduced in a way that minimizes disruption and maximizes the benefits for users and businesses.

Additionally, Sinha believes that involving stakeholders and consulting with industry experts is crucial to making informed decisions on new gTLDs. By soliciting feedback and considering different perspectives, the process can be more inclusive and reflective of the diverse needs and interests of internet users.

Sinha understands that the introduction of new gTLDs is a complex process that requires careful consideration of various factors. These factors may include market demand, potential impact on existing domains, technical feasibility, and the overall stability of the domain name system (DNS).

She believes that decision-making regarding new gTLDs should not be rushed but should follow a measured and systematic approach. Sinha advocates for incremental decision-making, meaning that decisions about introducing new gTLDs should be made step-by-step rather than all at once. This allows for thorough evaluation and minimizes any potential disruption or negative impact on the internet ecosystem.

She also encourages active involvement from stakeholders and industry experts during the decision-making process. By seeking input from a diverse range of perspectives, the process becomes more inclusive and ensures that the decisions made are well-informed and consider the needs and interests of different users and businesses.

Overall, Tripti Sinha's insights into incremental decision-making on new gTLDs highlight the importance of maintaining the stability and functionality of the DNS while exploring opportunities for expansion and innovation in the digital landscape.