This document clarifies the relationship between the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) and special-use domain names like the proposed .agent domain. While ICANN plays a central role in the global Domain Name System (DNS), special-use domains follow a different path that primarily involves the Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF) and the Internet Assigned Numbers Authority (IANA).
ICANN is responsible for coordinating the global DNS, including:
ICANN’s primary focus is on domains that are part of the global DNS hierarchy and are resolved through the conventional DNS infrastructure.
Special-use domains differ fundamentally from conventional top-level domains:
| Characteristic | Conventional TLDs (e.g., .com, .org) | Special-Use Domains (e.g., .onion, .local, proposed .agent) |
|---|---|---|
| Resolution Mechanism | Global DNS | Alternative mechanisms (P2P, local protocols, etc.) |
| Approval Process | ICANN new gTLD program | IETF standardization and IANA registration |
| Delegation in Root Zone | Yes | No |
| Commercial Registration | Typically yes | No |
| Primary Purpose | Human-readable web addresses | Technical infrastructure needs |
| Governance | ICANN policies | Technical specifications in RFCs |
Special-use domains follow a standardization path through the IETF rather than ICANN’s new gTLD process:
IETF Standardization: The domain’s purpose and technical specifications are documented in an Internet-Draft, which goes through the IETF consensus process to become an RFC.
IANA Registration: Based on the published RFC, IANA adds the domain to the Special-Use Domain Names registry.
No ICANN Application: There is no application to ICANN’s new gTLD program, as the domain is not intended for delegation in the DNS root zone.
No DNS Delegation: The domain is reserved to prevent conflicts but is not actually delegated in the DNS hierarchy.
While ICANN is not directly involved in approving special-use domains, there are important relationships:
IANA Function: ICANN currently performs the IANA functions under contract with the IETF, which includes maintaining the Special-Use Domain Names registry.
Coordination: ICANN and the IETF coordinate to ensure that special-use domains do not conflict with existing or planned TLDs.
Policy Consideration: ICANN’s policy development may take special-use domains into account when considering new TLDs.
Technical Advice: ICANN’s technical bodies may provide input during the IETF process for special-use domains.
For the proposed .agent special-use domain:
No ICANN Application Required: The .agent domain does not require an application through ICANN’s new gTLD program.
Focus on IETF Process: Efforts should focus on the IETF standardization process rather than ICANN engagement.
IANA Registration: After successful IETF standardization, IANA will register .agent in the Special-Use Domain Names registry.
ICANN Awareness: While not directly involved in approval, keeping ICANN informed of the proposal may be beneficial for coordination purposes.
There are limited circumstances where engagement with ICANN might be relevant:
Name Collision Analysis: If there are concerns about potential collisions with existing DNS usage.
Future TLD Plans: If ICANN is considering .agent as a potential future TLD.
Policy Implications: If the special-use domain has broader policy implications for the DNS.
Technical Coordination: For coordination between DNS and the alternative resolution mechanism.
Based on precedents like .onion and .local, the recommended approach for .agent is:
Primary Focus on IETF: Concentrate efforts on the IETF standardization process.
Minimal ICANN Engagement: Limited to informational updates rather than seeking approval.
Technical Documentation: Clearly document how .agent operates outside the conventional DNS.
Precedent Reference: Reference successful special-use domains like .onion in documentation.
While ICANN plays a crucial role in the global DNS, special-use domains like the proposed .agent domain follow a different path through the IETF and IANA. Understanding this distinction is important for efficiently navigating the standardization process.
The .agent proposal should focus on the IETF process, with ICANN engagement limited to informational coordination. By following the established path for special-use domains, the proposal can avoid unnecessary complications and focus on the technical standardization necessary for implementation.