New gTLD Program: Next Round

For another use, see New gTLD Program (2012).

The New gTLD Program: Next Round is the second round of introduction of new generic top-level domains (gTLDs), following the 2012 New gTLD Program, enabling the continued expansion of the Domain Name System (DNS). The Program gives businesses, communities, governments and other organizations the chance to apply for new top-level domains tailored to fit their organization, community, culture, language, and customer interests.

The program is being implemented by ICANN in line with community-developed policy recommendations contained in the Generic Names Supporting Organization's Final Report on the new gTLD Subsequent Procedures Policy Development Process.

Background

The first New gTLD Program application round opened in January 2012 and resulted in over a thousand new gTLD delegations, including geographic, community, brand, and generic strings. After the close of the 2012 round, ICANN and the community launched a broad series of reviews and studies on topics such as rights protection mechanisms, DNS abuse, consumer trust, competition, and name collisions.

In December 2015, the GNSO Council initiated the Policy Development Process on New gTLD Subsequent Procedures (SubPro) to determine whether, and under what conditions, additional application rounds should proceed. The GNSO New gTLD Subsequent Procedures (SubPro) Working Group conducted several years of deliberations, including work tracks on overarching issues, application types, geographic names, and technical and operational criteria. Its "Final Report on the new gTLD Subsequent Procedures Policy Development Process" was delivered in February 2021 and organized into a set of affirmations, recommendations, and implementation guidance across more than forty topics.

On February 18, 2021, the GNSO Council approved all SubPro outputs that achieved "Full Consensus" or "Consensus" and transmitted them to the ICANN Board. In 2023, the Board adopted ninety-eight of the recommendations and marked thirty-eight as pending while it consulted further with the GNSO and the GAC. The Board also requested an implementation plan from ICANN org describing how a subsequent round could be operationalized.

Policy Framework

The policy basis for the Next Round is the SubPro Final Report, which affirms the continuation of subsequent rounds for new gTLDs, the use of discrete application cycles ("rounds") rather than a fully continuous model, and the availability of different gTLD types (standard, community, geographic, and brand TLDs).

Applications in Rounds

SubPro recommends that further new gTLD applications continue to be processed in periodic rounds rather than through a fully continuous model. At the same time, it calls on ICANN to work toward more predictable and regularly recurring application opportunities, so that potential applicants can plan around an anticipated cadence of rounds and not face long, indeterminate gaps between them.

Applicant Types and TLD Categories

The Working Group confirms that some applications may receive differentiated treatment based on the nature of the application, the applied-for string, or the applicant. In practice, this preserves and refines the main categories from the 2012 round (standard, community-based, geographic, and .Brand TLDs) and links them to specific differences in eligibility, evaluation questions, contention rules, and contractual models. For example, community-based applications may be eligible for Community Priority Evaluation, geographic names are subject to additional questions and governmental input, .Brand TLDs may continue to use a tailored Registry Agreement, and eligible applicants may seek fee reductions and other benefits under the Applicant Support Program.

String Similarity

On string similarity, the Working Group reaffirms the 2007 policy that applied-for strings must not be confusingly similar to existing TLDs or reserved names. One of the most visible updates for the Next Round concerns plurals and singulars: SubPro recommends prohibiting delegation of singular and plural versions of the same word in the same language or script (for example, “.example” and “.examples”) in order to reduce the risk of user confusion.

In limited cases where two applied-for strings would normally be treated as a singular/plural pair but the applicants can demonstrate genuinely different intended meanings, both applications may proceed only if each applicant accepts a mandatory Public Interest Commitment (PIC) in its Registry Agreement. That commitment must state the intended use of the TLD and require registrants to use second-level domains in line with that stated purpose (for example, distinguishing clearly between a string used for a season and one used for a manufactured object).

Applicant Freedom and Safeguards

SubPro looked for a balance regarding to applicant freedom of expression with safeguards related to DNS Abuse, public interest commitments, and protections for specific categories of strings.

The Working Group reaffirmed Principle G from the 2007 policy, which states: "The string evaluation process must not infringe the applicant’s freedom of expression rights that are protected under internationally recognized principles of law." Also, The WG further affirmed Recommendation 3: "Strings must not infringe the existing legal rights of others that are recognized or enforceable under generally accepted and internationally recognized principles of law. Examples of these legal rights that are internationally recognized include, but are not limited to, rights defined in the Paris Convention for the Protection of Industrial Property (in particular trademark rights), the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (in particular freedom of speech rights)." Nevertheless, it should be taken into consideration the applicant's freedom of expression rights in the TLD proposed during pre-application through delegation stages of the process.

Applicant Support Program

SubPro recommends an expanded and better resourced Applicant Support Program targeted at eligible applicants with limited financial means, particularly from underserved regions and communities. The policy framework envisages reduced fees, non-financial support such as pro bono services, and carefully structured mechanisms (including possible bid credits in contention resolution) designed to improve the chances that supported applicants can successfully obtain and operate a gTLD.

Registry Service Provider Pre-evaluation

The topic of Registry Service Provider Pre-evaluation introduces a standing RSP pre-evaluation process, open to both incumbent and new back-end operators, through which providers can be assessed against technical and operational criteria prior to an application round. Pre-evaluated RSPs are then listed for use by applicants, with SubPro specifying that each round requires a fresh evaluation or streamlined reassessment, and clarifying that participation in the program does not in itself make an RSP a “contracted party” of ICANN.

IDNs and Variants

The Final Report reaffirmed that IDN gTLDs are an integral part of the New gTLD Program and sets out requirements for compliance with RZ-LGR and IDNA2008. It also introduced policy principles for IDN variant management at the top level, including conditions under which variants may be delegated and the requirement that variant sets be operated by the same registry operator and back-end provider, anticipating further detailed implementation through the IDN EPDP and related work.

According to ICANN, the Next Round will support applications for new gTLDs in any language or script that has a common and widespread use by a community, but only for scripts that are integrated into the Root Zone Label Generation Rules (RZ-LGR). For the 2026 round, ICANN will use RZ-LGR version 6, which currently covers twenty-seven scripts: Arabic, Armenian, Bangla, Chinese (Han), Cyrillic, Devanagari, Ethiopic, Georgian, Greek, Gujarati, Gurmukhi, Hebrew, Japanese (Hiragana, Katakana, and Kanji [Han]), Kannada, Khmer, Korean (Hangul and Hanja [Han]), Lao, Latin, Malayalam, Myanmar, Oriya, Sinhala, Tamil, Telugu, Thaana, and Thai.

If an applicant wishes to apply for a new gTLD in a script that is not yet supported by the RZ-LGR but has common and widespread use, the application will be put on hold until the relevant script community forms a Generation Panel and develops an LGR proposal. That proposal is then reviewed by the Integration Panel and, if approved, integrated into the RZ-LGR under the "Procedure to Develop and Maintain the Label Generation Rules for the Root Zone in Respect of IDNA Labels".

Closed Generics and IDN Policy Dependencies

Closed generics were treated as a pending topic during SubPro and the Operational Design Phase, and were the subject of a 2022–2023 Facilitated Dialogue among the GAC, GNSO, and ALAC. After considering the dialogue outcomes and GAC/ALAC advice, the ICANN Board decided in January 2024 that closed generic gTLD applications will not be permitted in the 2026 round unless and until an approved methodology and criteria are developed to assess their compatibility with the public interest.

The Expedited Policy Development Process on Internationalized Domain Names (IDNs) provides the detailed rules for IDN gTLDs and top-level variants in the Next Round. Phase 1 recommendations, which cover top-level IDN definitions and variant sets, were fully adopted by the ICANN Board in 2024–2025 and are being implemented through an IDN Implementation Review Team as a sub-track of the SubPro IRT. Phase 2 recommendations, focused on second-level variant management, have been approved by the GNSO Council and are currently under ICANN Board consideration following a 2024–2025 public comment proceeding.

Operational Design and Implementation Plan

Following receipt of the SubPro Final Report, ICANN org conducted an Operational Design Phase (ODP) to assess the practical, financial, and risk implications of implementing the new policies. The resulting Operational Design Assessment (ODA) was delivered to the ICANN Board in late 2022.

On July 31,2023, ICANN org published the New gTLD Program: Next Round Implementation Plan, which decomposes the program into multiple projects, including program foundations, systems and tools, the Applicant Support Program, the RSP Evaluation Program, application processing, evaluation, objections, contention resolution, contracting, and post-contracting operations. The plan also includes detailed timelines for each project and identifies dependencies on parallel community work, such as IDN policy and closed generics.

Subsequent status updates, including a February 2024 Implementation Status Update and periodic blogs, have tracked progress against the plan, highlighting milestones such as the launch of support and RSP programs and the development of application systems.

SubPro Implementation Review Team

To help ensure fidelity to the policy recommendations, the GNSO Council chartered the SubPro Implementation Review Team (IRT). The IRT consists of community volunteers who review draft implementation proposals, comment on operational details that interpret policy, and receive regular updates on communications, outreach, and systems development.

ICANN org provides monthly reports to the IRT on outreach and engagement efforts for the Next Round, and holds regular IRT calls where program timelines, draft Applicant Guidebook text, and related implementation topics are discussed.

ICANN Oversight

The ICANN Board oversees the overall direction of the Next Round, adopting relevant policy recommendations, approving key program documents such as the Applicant Guidebook (AGB), and authorizing the opening of the application window. ICANN org is responsible for detailed program design, systems implementation, contracting, and ongoing operations, reporting back to the Board and community through public sessions at ICANN meetings and written updates.

Program Architecture

The Next Round program architecture combines multiple components and systems that together enable the application and evaluation process.

Applicant Guidebook

The "Applicant Guidebook (AGB)" sets out the detailed rules, criteria, and procedures for applying for and operating a new gTLD. For the 2026 round, the AGB is expected to incorporate the adopted SubPro recommendations, updated contractual language, revised objection and contention processes, and new material on IDNs, RSP pre-evaluation, and support mechanisms. The Applicant Guidebook for the 2026 round is being developed through the SubPro Implementation Review Team (IRT) process and iterative drafts. ICANN published a draft version of the Next Round Applicant Guidebook for Public Comment on May 30, 2025 and has indicated that it expects to publish the final version by December 2025, ahead of the projected 2026 application window.

The Applicant Guidebook for the 2026 round was adopted by the ICANN Board at ICANN 84 on November 3, 2025, following more than 250 hours of Implementation Review Team meetings and five Public Comment proceedings on successive drafts. As stipulated by the community, the AGB must be available at least four months before the application window opens. In its ICANN84 resolution, the Board directed ICANN org to publish the final AGB text no later than 30 December 30, 2025 and authorized only insignificant changes while org aligns Dispute Resolution Service Provider rules and performs final consistency checks.

Program Costs and Evaluation Fees

ICANN has set an expected evaluation fee of USD 227,000 for applications in the 2026 round of the New gTLD Program. While the fee will not be formally confirmed until the ICANN Board approves the Applicant Guidebook for the Next Round, publishing the expected amount is intended to give prospective applicants a concrete basis for business planning and decision-making.

The expected fee level reflects program-related decisions taken at the ICANN Board workshop of September 6-8, 2024 in Los Angeles, including adoption of the remaining Internationalized Domain Names Expedited Policy Development Process Phase 1 recommendation on application fees and Security and Stability Advisory Committee advice related to Name Collision Analysis. Consistent with the GNSO Subsequent Procedures Final Report, the fee is set on a cost-recovery basis: it is intended to cover the full costs of running the New gTLD Program and to be revenue-neutral, so that the round is not subsidized by existing ICANN funding sources such as gTLD registry and registrar fees, ccTLD contributions, or Regional Internet Registry contributions.

The gTLD evaluation fee does not include charges for elective conditional evaluations, which are assessed separately. Conditional evaluations are optional assessments that an applicant may request in order to obtain specific statuses or treatment, such as Community Priority Evaluation for community-based applications or eligibility for the .Brand TLD model.

Systems and Tools

ICANN is deploying a new “TLD Application Management System (TAMS)” to replace the 2012 TAS platform. TAMS is designed to support application submission, document management, evaluation workflows, communications between ICANN and applicants, and publication of application data.

Additional tools include portals for the Applicant Support Program, the RSP Evaluation Program, and public information sites that present timelines, FAQs, and outreach materials for potential applicants.

Outreach and Communications

ICANN's outreach and communications strategy for the Next Round includes:

• A dedicated Next Round information portal with general information, timelines, FAQs, and links to detailed resources.
• The "Next Round Reports" series, which documents monthly outreach, engagement, and communications activities shared with the SubPro IRT.
• Webinars, regional events, and presentations at ICANN Public Meetings aimed at governments, businesses, civil society, technical communities, and potential applicants.
• Tailored materials such as slide decks and "champions toolkits" that organizations can reuse to raise awareness in their own communities.

These efforts aim to increase global diversity in the DNS sector, raise awareness of the Next Round and the Applicant Support Program beyond the existing ICANN community, and encourage applications from regions and communities that have been under-represented in previous rounds.

Applicant Support Program

The Applicant Support Program (ASP) provides financial and non-financial assistance to eligible applicants, particularly those from underserved regions or with limited resources. Qualifying supported applicants may receive reduced evaluation fees, access to pro bono professional services, and preferential treatment in any ICANN Auction of Last Resort within defined parameters.

The ASP opened in late 2024 and accepted applications for support until November 2025.

IDNs and Applicant Support

The Next Round gives particular attention to IDN gTLDs and applicants from underserved regions. IDN policy outputs, including the IDN EPDP Phase 1 recommendations, inform how IDN strings and variants are handled in the program, especially with respect to script rules, variant management, and security and stability concerns.

The Applicant Support Program is explicitly intended to lower barriers for eligible applicants, including those proposing IDN strings or serving communities with limited prior participation in the gTLD space. Non-financial support may include mentorship, legal and policy advice, and technical assistance provided by volunteer experts coordinated by ICANN.

ICANN's outreach strategy for the Next Round includes regional engagement, multilingual materials, and partnerships with local organizations to reach potential applicants that may otherwise be unaware of the opportunity to apply for a gTLD.

RSP Evaluation Program

The "Registry Service Provider (RSP) Evaluation Program" pre-evaluates registry back-end operators against technical and operational criteria so that new gTLD applicants can select from a list of approved providers rather than each undergoing a full technical review.

The program includes two evaluation periods: an initial pre-application period from November 2024 to May 2025, and a second period aligned with the 2026 application window. RSPs that successfully complete evaluation are listed on a dedicated page for use by prospective applicants.

Applicant Journey

Pre-Application Phase

In the pre-application phase, prospective applicants are expected to review the Applicant Guidebook, evaluate business cases for operating a gTLD, and identify potential strings and registry service providers. ICANN supports this phase with information materials, webinars, regional engagement activities, and an outreach “toolkit” aimed at organizations that can promote awareness of the Next Round in their communities.

Applicants requiring financial or capacity support are encouraged to apply to the Applicant Support Program sufficiently in advance of the main application window.

Application Submission

During the 2026 application window, applicants submit their gTLD applications through TAMS. Each application must provide detailed information about the applicant entity, the proposed string, registry services, technical and operational plans, financial capabilities, and policies for abuse mitigation and rights protection.

Application fees are set on a cost-recovery basis for the program and are published in the AGB and related fee documentation.

Evaluation

Once the application window closes, ICANN conducts a series of evaluations, which may include:

• Administrative completeness checks: verifying that required fields and supporting materials have been provided.
• String similarity and DNS stability review: assessing the applied-for string for potential confusion with existing or other applied-for strings and for technical stability concerns.
• Technical and operational evaluation: reviewing the registry services architecture, DNSSEC plans, and other technical aspects; applicants using pre-evaluated RSPs may undergo a streamlined review.
• Financial evaluation: examining whether the applicant has the financial resources to operate the registry over the long term.

Additional IDN-specific checks apply to IDN gTLDs, including script rules, variant management, and consistency with Root Zone Label Generation Rules and IDN policy.

Objections and Dispute Resolution

As in the 2012 round, third parties may file objections on defined grounds, such as string confusion, legal rights, community opposition, or limited public interest. Designated dispute resolution providers evaluate objections and issue expert determinations, which can affect whether an application proceeds or is terminated.

SubPro refined aspects of the objection process, and these refinements are reflected in the Next Round's Applicant Guidebook and procedural documentation.

String Contention and Contention Resolution

If multiple applications are received for the identical string, they are placed into a contention set. Contention can be resolved through community priority evaluation (for qualifying community applications), voluntary agreements among applicants, or, as a last resort, an ICANN-managed auction mechanism.

ICANN has issued a Request for Information (RFI) regarding auction service providers specifically for the Next Round, with the aim of ensuring compliance with policy requirements and operational standards.

Contracting and Delegation

Successful applicants that pass evaluation, resolve any objections and contention, and meet all program requirements are invited to sign a Registry Agreement (RA) with ICANN. After contracting and pre-delegation testing, the new gTLD is inserted into the DNS root zone and can begin its launch phases (such as Sunrise, Claims, and general availability) according to applicable rights protection rules.

Governance and ICANN Community Dynamics

The Next Round reflects input from multiple ICANN structures:

• The GNSO Council served as the policy manager for the SubPro PDP, adopted the Final Report, and later issued a clarifying statement for recommendations the Board had marked as pending.
• The GAC has tracked the Next Round through a dedicated activity page and has issued advice and correspondence on topics such as closed generics, safeguards, public interest considerations, and geographic names.
• The SSAC and other advisory bodies have contributed guidance on DNS stability, name collisions, and security considerations relevant to the program.

Community discussions continue on how best to incorporate DNS abuse safeguards, predictability, and public interest considerations into the Next Round's implementation, with many of these themes surfacing in public comment proceedings and ICANN meeting sessions.

Issues and Debates

Several topics have generated sustained community debate in relation to the Next Round:

• Closed generics: whether and under what conditions single-registrant TLDs for generic terms should be allowed, and what safeguards or public interest tests would apply. This topic was the focus of a 2022–2023 Facilitated Dialogue among GAC, GNSO, and ALAC representatives and multiple rounds of GAC advice. After considering the dialogue’s Outcomes Report and community inputs, the ICANN Board decided in January 2024 that closed generic gTLD applications will not be permitted in the 2026 round unless and until an approved framework is developed to assess their compatibility with the public interest.

• DNS Abuse and safeguards: Expectations that Next Round applicants adopt stronger measures against DNS Abuse than those in place during the 2012 round, including more prescriptive contractual provisions, clearer obligations around monitoring and reporting, and greater transparency over how abuse is detected and mitigated. GAC advice, community comments, and ICANN's implementation updates all highlight DNS Abuse as a central concern for the design of the Applicant Guidebook and Registry Agreement for the 2026 round.

• Predictability and subsequent rounds: Calls from many stakeholders for more regular and predictable application opportunities beyond the 2026 round, rather than ad-hoc “one-off” large rounds separated by long gaps. The SubPro Final Report recommends adoption of a Predictability Framework and the creation of a Standing Predictability Implementation Review Team (SPIRT) to handle changes affecting the program, as well as requirements that future application procedures occur at predictable, regularly occurring intervals unless extraordinary circumstances justify a pause.

• Latin script diacritics: Questions about how Latin-script labels that use diacritic characters (for example, á, ç, ğ, ł, ñ, ś, ů) should be handled at the top and second levels, and what rules should govern their relationship to ASCII-only equivalents. A dedicated Policy Development Process on Latin Script Diacritics was initiated by the GNSO Council in 2024, reflecting concerns about end-user confusion, Universal Acceptance, and interoperability between ASCII and diacritic variants. Although this PDP is not a formal dependency for opening the 2026 round, its outcomes are expected to influence how future Latin-script IDN gTLDs and their second-level registrations are treated.

Timeline

The following high-level milestones summarize the path toward the Next Round:

• 2012: First New gTLD Program application round opens and later closes; evaluation, objections, contention, and contracting processes continue over several years.
• 2015–2016: GNSO initiates the SubPro PDP; Working Group begins its deliberations.
• February 2021: SubPro Final Report delivered; GNSO Council approves its consensus outputs.
• 2022: ICANN org completes the Operational Design Assessment of the SubPro recommendations.
• July 2023: ICANN publishes the New gTLD Program: Next Round Implementation Plan.
• 2023–2024: Implementation work continues; ICANN issues status updates, publishes draft implementation materials, and engages with the SubPro IRT.
• Late 2024: ICANN launches the Applicant Support Program and opens the first RSP Evaluation Program window.
• 2025: Ongoing evaluation of ASP requests and RSP applications; ICANN Board approves the Next Round Applicant Guidebook at ICANN84, to be completed in December.
• 2026: Application window for the 2026 round expected to open in April for 12–15 weeks.

Generic Top-level Domain

Generic Top-level Domain

Generic Names Supporting Organization. Develops and recommends to the Board substantive policies relating to generic top-level domains and other responsibilities set forth in the Bylaws (ICANN Bylaws).

Governmental Advisory Committee. Considers and provides advice on the activities of ICANN as they relate to concerns of governments, particularly matters where there may be an interaction between ICANN's policies and various laws and international agreements or where they may affect public policy issues (ICANN Bylaws).

Top-Level Domain

Top-Level Domain

Internationalized Domain Name

Internationalized Domain Name

Expedited Policy Development Process

At-Large Advisory Committee. Considers and provides advice on the activities of ICANN related to the interests of individual Internet users (ICANN Bylaws). Not to be confused with the Non-Commercial Stakeholder Group.

Country code top-level domain. Determined by "ISO 3166-1: Codes for the representation of names of countries and their subdivisions — Part 1: Country codes".

Domain Name System Security Extensions

Policy Development Process

Security and Stability Advisory Committee. Advises the ICANN community and Board on matters relating to the security and integrity of the Internet's naming and address allocation systems (ICANN Bylaws).

American Standard Code for Information Interchange