Inside ICANN How Global Internet Policy Gets Made

The governance of the internet’s domain name system (DNS), including top-level domains (TLDs) like .com, .org, and country-specific extensions such as .uk or .br, is one of the most intricate and consequential processes in global digital infrastructure. At the heart of this governance is the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers, better known as ICANN. Founded in 1998, ICANN is a nonprofit organization headquartered in Los Angeles, but its influence extends across the globe. It is responsible for coordinating the maintenance and procedures of several databases related to the namespaces and numerical spaces of the internet, ensuring the network’s stable and secure operation. Among its most visible roles is overseeing the allocation and management of TLDs, a function that is simultaneously technical, legal, political, and commercial.

ICANN operates through a unique model of multistakeholder governance. Unlike traditional intergovernmental organizations, ICANN does not rely solely on nation-states for decision-making authority. Instead, it brings together a diverse array of stakeholders, including governments, civil society, technical experts, academia, businesses, and individual users. This model, while praised for its inclusivity and flexibility, is also complex and sometimes unwieldy. The organization is structured into various supporting organizations and advisory committees. These include the Generic Names Supporting Organization (GNSO), which develops policy related to generic TLDs; the Country Code Names Supporting Organization (ccNSO), focusing on country code TLDs; the Governmental Advisory Committee (GAC), where national governments provide input; and the At-Large Advisory Committee (ALAC), representing individual internet users.

Policy development within ICANN does not follow a top-down approach. Instead, it is a bottom-up, consensus-driven process that can span years. For instance, when considering whether to approve a new generic top-level domain or modify an existing policy affecting DNS operations, the issue is first raised in one of the supporting organizations, often the GNSO. A working group may then be formed, composed of volunteers representing various interests. These groups meet virtually and at ICANN’s three annual public meetings held in different parts of the world. Through painstaking negotiation, drafting, and public consultation, a proposed policy gradually takes shape. It is subject to multiple rounds of public comment, internal review, and revision before eventually being adopted by the ICANN Board of Directors.

The ICANN Board itself is a body of 20 members who are selected by different segments of the ICANN community, including the Nominating Committee and various supporting organizations. The board plays a crucial role in reviewing and endorsing the policy recommendations developed by the community, though it generally refrains from rewriting them. This reflects ICANN’s commitment to the multistakeholder ethos: policies should emerge from consensus, not from top-down fiat. However, this approach has not been without controversy. Critics have pointed out that the system can be slow and overly bureaucratic, with well-resourced corporate stakeholders sometimes wielding disproportionate influence. Others argue that the multistakeholder model remains the best available mechanism for governing a global resource like the internet, especially given the alternative of nation-state control or privatized monopolies.

A particularly illustrative example of ICANN’s complex governance is the rollout of the new gTLD program, which began in earnest in 2012. This program allowed organizations to apply for new TLDs beyond the traditional set, leading to the creation of domains such as .app, .nyc, and .xyz. The application process was lengthy and expensive, requiring applicants to pay a $185,000 fee and undergo rigorous vetting. Community groups raised concerns about potential abuse, trademark infringement, and the implications for competition and consumer trust. The program prompted ICANN to develop extensive safeguards, including dispute resolution mechanisms and public interest commitments that registries were required to uphold. The controversy surrounding applications for names like .amazon, which sparked a years-long dispute between the Amazon corporation and governments of countries in the Amazon River region, underscores the geopolitical sensitivities involved.

Another critical moment in ICANN’s evolution came in 2016, when it completed the IANA stewardship transition. For years, ICANN operated under a contract with the United States Department of Commerce, giving the U.S. government a final oversight role over the DNS root zone. While largely ceremonial in practice, this arrangement drew criticism from other countries, especially following revelations about global surveillance programs. After years of preparatory work, ICANN and its community successfully transitioned the stewardship of IANA functions (Internet Assigned Numbers Authority) from the U.S. government to the global multistakeholder community, a landmark in internet governance. The transition was heralded as a victory for global digital sovereignty, though it also placed renewed pressure on ICANN to demonstrate transparency, accountability, and independence.

ICANN’s role continues to evolve in response to emerging challenges such as DNS abuse, cybersecurity, privacy regulation, and the growing influence of non-Western actors in the internet ecosystem. The EU’s General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR), for instance, forced ICANN to reexamine its WHOIS system, which historically provided public access to domain registration data. Balancing data protection with the needs of law enforcement, cybersecurity researchers, and IP rights holders has proven difficult, highlighting the legal and cultural tensions embedded in global internet policy.

Despite its imperfections, ICANN remains a rare example of functional global cooperation in a deeply polarized world. It serves as a microcosm of internet governance at large—where diplomacy, commerce, technology, and ideology collide. Its meetings, often lengthy and arcane, are nonetheless the forums where decisions affecting billions of internet users are debated and decided. Understanding how ICANN works is essential not only for those within the tech sector, but for anyone interested in the future of the digital commons. The internet’s neutrality, openness, and reliability rest in no small part on the decisions made inside ICANN.

The governance of the internet’s domain name system (DNS), including top-level domains (TLDs) like .com, .org, and country-specific extensions such as .uk or .br, is one of the most intricate and consequential processes in global digital infrastructure. At the heart of this governance is the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers, better known as…