ICANN is ending its public consultation regarding the technical rules concerned with linking generic top-level domains in the global DNS to alternative naming systems that have the same names, a move prompted by registry operators and applicants who wish to offer names both in the DNS and in systems such as those based on blockchain.

The public-comment proceeding closes September 21 at 23:59 UTC. ICANN’s submission list showed 29 comments at the time of reporting, up from 28 earlier in the day.

The proposed model requires the same string to remain under the same controller. The Technical Study Group’s initial report calls this “string+controller integration”: a name used in the DNS and an integrated alternative system would have to be controlled by the same party, with the registry responsible for maintaining that relationship. The group concludes that such integrations are unlikely to create significant DNS security or stability problems if appropriate operational controls are imposed.

The model is deliberately narrower than alternative naming systems generally. The initial report says ICANN need not become involved in such systems except where they impinge on the global naming system. It explicitly leaves the long-term viability of non-DNS naming systems, general policy and competition questions outside the study’s scope.

Several commenters argue that the draft nevertheless crosses from technical requirements into policy. The Registrar Stakeholder Group says some recommendations could be treated as mandatory requirements and raises concerns about ICANN’s contractual “Picket Fence,” which limits subjects on which registries and registrars can be bound through consensus policies. Tucows similarly says the report goes too far into policymaking. .ART Domain Registry supports a common technical baseline but argues that some recommendations belong in policy development or registry negotiations.

Other submissions address the question of whether the safeguards are technically adequate. The Constituency of Internet Service Providers and Connectivity Providers states that the draft should include more detailed risk assessments, controller-assurance mechanisms, monitoring, and mandatory provisions relating to continuity and shutdown. Likewise, India’s ministry of electronics and information technology requests measurable requirements in the areas of synchronization, failure handling, independent security testing and measures to guard against inconsistent ownership across systems.

Existing alternative-system registrations present a separate collision of claims. Multiple commenters want holders of names such as .crypto, .nft and .wallet to receive protections if matching strings enter the DNS. Those questions expose the boundary the study group has drawn: it is assessing whether a registry-controlled integration can operate securely, not settling broader ownership or priority claims between the DNS and independently operated namespaces.

When the comments close, the study group will revise its report. ICANN stated that a later consultation will link a draft final report with proposed registry-agreement text, this possibly leading to standard terms being available for the existing registries and applicants taking part in the 2026 new-gTLD round who wish to offer such integrations.