Last published on: 7 October 2026 at 15:21 UTC
This question set collects information regarding the legal entity that would enter into a Registry Agreement with ICANN upon successful completion of all relevant application processes. The information collected is intended to be used for background screening.
Provide the full legal name of the applying entity as it appears on the official registration documents. Do not use abbreviations.
XRegistry Incorporated
Provide the name under which the applying entity is doing business, if different from the full legal name answered in Question 1. Such a name must be registered with appropriate local jurisdiction or public authority.
XRegistry Inc.
Provide the long form (no acronyms) of the legal entity form/business structure of the applying entity as it appears on the official registration documents. If the original script of the legal entity form/business structure is not English, ONLY provide its official English translation. No additional information should be provided as this will be used for the automatic population of the Registry Agreement.
Stock Company
The jurisdiction indicates the location in which the business of the applying entity is registered for legal and financial purposes. This is either 1) a country name, or a 2) state/territory name, depending on where the applying entity is registered. No additional information should be provided as this will be used for the automatic population of the Base Registry Agreement. Examples include "Delaware", "Germany", etc.
Japan
Provide the website URL of the applying entity, if available.
https://www.xserver.co.jp/companies/xsr.php
1. Choose Yes or No. 2. Use the definition of Affiliate from the Base Registry Agreement (see https://www.icann.org/en/registry-agreements/base-agreement).
true
1. Specify if the applying entity is an existing registry operator, ICANN accredited registrar, and/or an Affiliate of a registry operator and/or registrar. 2. If the applying entity is an Affiliate, provide the details of such Affiliate relationship, including the name of the affiliated registry operator and/or registrar. 3. If the applying entity is an ICANN accredited registrar, specify the registrar ID number.
Affiliate of XServer Inc. registrar with IANA ID 1557
Choose Yes or No.
false
81
Provide the primary business phone number without including the country code.
06-6450-8208
Provide the primary business email address of the applying entity.
icann@xregistry.co.jp
Enter the street address (no PO Box).
Grand Front Osaka Tower A 32F 4-20
Ofukacho, Kita-ku
Enter the city, village, municipality, etc.
Osaka
Enter the state, province, department, territory, prefecture, oblast, etc., if applicable.
Osaka
1. Enter the postal code, if applicable. 2. If a postal code does not exist, type “Not Applicable”.
5300011
JP
If applicable, provide the full legal name as it appears on the official registration documents of the Direct Parent Company of the applying entity. Do not use abbreviations.
XServer Incorporated
Provide the name under which the Direct Parent Company is doing business, if different from the full legal name answered in Question 26. Such a name must be registered with appropriate local jurisdiction or public authority.
XServer Inc.
Provide the long form (no acronyms) of the legal entity form/business structure of the Direct Parent Company as it appears on the official registration documents. If the original script of the legal entity form/business structure is not English, ONLY provide its official English translation.
Stock Company
The jurisdiction indicates the location in which the business of the Direct Parent Company is registered for legal and financial purposes. This is either 1) a country name, or a 2) state/territory name, depending on where the Direct Parent Company is registered. Examples include "Delaware", "Germany", etc.
Japan
This question set collects information related to the individuals who will have access to TAMS, manage the application, and receive inquiries.
Yannik SIMON, Yohei ISHIMARU
Yannik SIMON
Provide a single document for Self-Certification question Q4.2-1. The document must include only the SC4.2-1.1, SC4.2-1.2, or SC4.2-1.3 statements. Do not modify any of the Self-Certification statements.
1. Provide a single document for Self-Certification question Q4.2-1. 2. The document must include only the SC4.2-1.1 through SC4.2-1.3 statements. 3. Do not modify any of the Self-Certification statements. 4. If the applying entity cannot Self-Certify the SC4.2-1.1 through SC4.2-1.3 statements, provide a document that explains why the applying entity cannot Self-Certify the SC4.2-1.1 through SC4.2-1.3 statements.
Provide a single document for Self-Certification question AGB Q220, Q5.1-1. The document must include only the SC5.1-1.1 through SC5.1-1.3 statements. Do not modify any of the Self-Certification statements. If the applicant cannot Self-Certify SC5.1-1.1 through SC5.1-1.3 statements, provide a document that explains why the entity cannot Self-Certify the SC5.1-1.1 through SC5.1-1.3 statements.
1. Provide a single document for Self-Certification question Q5.1-1. 2. The document must include only the SC5.1-1.1 through SC5.1-1.3 statements. 3. Do not modify any of the Self-Certification statements. 4. If the applying entity cannot Self-Certify the SC5.1-1.1 through SC5.1-1.3 statements, provide a document that explains why the applying entity cannot Self-Certify the SC5.1-1.1 through SC5.1.1-3 statements.
Provide a single document for Self-Certification question AGB Q221, Q5.2-1. The document must include only the SC5.2-1.1 through SC5.2-1.7 statements. Do not modify any of the Self-Certification statements. If the applicant cannot Self-Certify the SC5.2-1.1 through SC5.2-1.7 statements, provide a document that explains why the applying entity cannot Self-Certify the SC5.2-1.1 through SC5.2-1.7 statements.
1. Provide a single document for Self-Certification question Q5.2-1. 2. The document must include only the SC5.2-1.1 through SC5.2-1.7 statements. 3. Do not modify any of the Self-Certification statements. 4. If the applying entity cannot Self-Certify the SC5.2-1.1 through SC5.2-1.7 statements, provide a document that explains why the applying entity cannot Self-Certify the SC5.2-1.1 through SC5.2-1.7 statements.
This question set collects basic information regarding the string that is being applied for (for example, a-label, meaning, script). If the applying entity opts to designate a replacement string, it must answer the same set of questions for the replacement string from the AGB Question Set 5 on.
xio
Provide the meaning, or restatement of the string in English, that is, a description of the literal meaning of the string in the opinion of the applying entity. If there is no literal meaning in English (for example, a brand name or a proper noun without a translation) simply state "No English Translation"
Coined technical abbreviation read as "x-IO": "x" in its technical sense of "cross" (cross-platform, cross-origin) and "IO" for input/output. The string denotes cross-system input and output, i.e. data exchange, particularly for AI applications.
Provide a representation of the string according to the International Phonetic Alphabet.
/ˌɛks.aɪˈoʊ/
Confirm the statement using a checkbox.
true
1. Describe the mission and purpose of the applied-for gTLD, including the intended registrants and users, and the related activities that have been or will be carried out to achieve this purpose. 1a. If applying for a variant of an existing gTLD, please also describe the mission and purpose of the existing gTLD, including the intended registrants and users, and the related activities that have been or will be carried out to achieve this purpose. 2. Explain how this purpose is sustainable over time.
The mission of .xio is to give the software integration layer a namespace that names what it does. The string is read as ""x-IO"": ""x"" in its established technical sense of ""cross"", as in cross-platform, cross-origin or cross-compile, and ""IO"" as the ordinary abbreviation for input/output. Together they denote cross-system input and output - the point at which one system sends data to, or receives data from, another. The string is applied for and will be operated as an open namespace in that plain descriptive sense. Registrants are the organisations and people who build and operate machine-to-machine interfaces: providers of artificial intelligence and machine learning services, including model and inference providers, agent and orchestration frameworks, retrieval and vector infrastructure, and evaluation or observability tooling; API-first software vendors; integration, middleware and automation platforms; data pipeline and streaming operators; robotics, sensor and connected-device vendors; cloud and hosting providers; open source projects; and individual developers. Users are the people and the software that reach those addresses: engineers reading documentation and configuring endpoints, and the client libraries, services and automated clients that resolve a name in order to call an interface. The clearest present case for the string is the machine-facing surface of AI systems. A model or inference provider exposes an endpoint that client code calls. An agent framework discovers and calls tools over declared interfaces. A retrieval or vector service is reached by a pipeline rather than by a person. An evaluation or observability service receives traces emitted by a running system. In each case the address is written once into documentation or configuration and is thereafter used by software, not typed by a human. That is the position .xio names: an address whose audience is another system. Holding those endpoints separately from a marketing domain also allows an operator to version, relocate or transfer an interface without touching its public site. The gTLD has it's use as Interfaces are named poorly today. An endpoint is typically a subdomain of a company's marketing domain, which ties a long-lived technical address to a name chosen for commercial reasons and tells the reader nothing about what sits behind it. A short top-level namespace whose term is precisely ""cross input/output"" resolves that mismatch: name.xio is compact, readable to the audience that matters, and self-describing. The demand for short, io-terminating names is already demonstrated: developer-facing services have used a two-letter country-code TLD for this purpose for more than a decade, without connection to the territory it designates. .xio offers the same brevity inside the gTLD space, under a Registry Agreement and ICANN policy. .xio is open. There is no eligibility screening before registration; any person or entity may register, through any ICANN-accredited registrar. Registrations are not limited to the applying entity or its affiliates. A .xio name is attached to a running interface: referenced in documentation, embedded in client configurations, written into third-party integrations. Names in that position are renewed for as long as the service exists, because changing them costs more than keeping them making the market for the gTLD sustainable.
This question set collects information related to determining whether certain Safeguard Public Interest Commitments (Safeguard PICs) are required for the applied-for gTLD string. See Section 7.8.2.3 Safeguard PICs. Answers to these questions will inform assessment by ICANN on whether and which Safeguard PICs must be incorporated in the applicable Registry Agreement (RA) if the string proceeds to delegation. The answers themselves will not automatically make such a determination.
1. When answering the questions, apply criteria by considering the meaning of the requested TLD string in the following contexts: a. Literally as described in the application b. Literally in any other language in which the string is a recognized word or phrase. c. Informally in any language or regional variant, where alternative meanings exist. 2. If the proverbial “reasonable person” who understands the relevant context believes that the question should be answered ‘yes’, then the answer is yes.
No
1. When answering the questions, apply criteria by considering the meaning of the requested TLD string in the following contexts: a. Literally as described in the application b. Literally in any other language in which the string is a recognized word or phrase. c. Informally in any language or regional variant, where alternative meanings exist. 2. If the proverbial “reasonable person” who understands the relevant context believes that the question should be answered ‘yes’, then the answer is yes.
No
1. When answering the questions, apply criteria by considering the meaning of the requested TLD string in the following contexts: a. Literally as described in the application b. Literally in any other language in which the string is a recognized word or phrase. c. Informally in any language or regional variant, where alternative meanings exist. 2. If the proverbial “reasonable person” who understands the relevant context believes that the question should be answered ‘yes’, then the answer is yes.
No
1. When answering the questions, apply criteria by considering the meaning of the requested TLD string in the following contexts: a. Literally as described in the application b. Literally in any other language in which the string is a recognized word or phrase. c. Informally in any language or regional variant, where alternative meanings exist. 2. If the proverbial “reasonable person” who understands the relevant context believes that the question should be answered ‘yes’, then the answer is yes.
No
1. When answering the questions, apply criteria by considering the meaning of the requested TLD string in the following contexts: a. Literally as described in the application b. Literally in any other language in which the string is a recognized word or phrase. c. Informally in any language or regional variant, where alternative meanings exist. I-2. If the proverbial “reasonable person” who understands the relevant context believes that the question should be answered ‘yes’, then the answer is yes.
No
1. When answering the questions, apply criteria by considering the meaning of the requested TLD string in the following contexts: a. Literally as described in the application b. Literally in any other language in which the string is a recognized word or phrase. c. Informally in any language or regional variant, where alternative meanings exist. I-2. If the proverbial “reasonable person” who understands the relevant context believes that the question should be answered ‘yes’, then the answer is yes.
No
Select Yes or No. Notes: 1. ICANN will evaluate whether an applied-for gTLD string requires one or more Safeguard Public Interest Commitments (Safeguard PICs) to be included in the Base RA). 2. In addition to the Mandatory Public Interest Commitments (PICs) that must be included in each Base RA, a subset of Base RAs must include Safeguard PICs based on ICANN’s Safeguard Assessment. See Section 7.8.2.3 Safeguard PICs. 3. Applying entities for TLDs that are not found to require Safeguard PICs can elect to add them to the applicable Base RAs voluntarily to, for example, further their business objectives, help address issues or concerns that are raised or could be raised with respect to their applications, or avoid the need for the evaluation and implementation of customized Registry Voluntary Commitment (RVC). See Section 7.8.3 Registry Voluntary Commitments (RVCs).
No
This question set collects information related to any Registry Voluntary Commitments (RVCs) that the applying entity is submitting. The decision to submit an RVC is typically voluntary, except for those recognized by ICANN to resolve an objection or to address GAC Consensus Advice. See Section 7.8.3 Registry Voluntary Commitments for more information.
1. Select Yes or No. 2. In addition to Safeguard Public Interest Commitments (PICs), an applying entity will be permitted to propose one or more Registry Voluntary Commitments (RVCs) to provide additional safeguards with regard to the registry operator’s operation of an applied-for gTLD string. See Section 7.8.3 Registry Voluntary Commitments (RVCs). 3. RVCs are separate from Community Registration Policies. See Section 7.8.3 Registry Voluntary Commitments (RVCs) and Section 7.8.4 Community Registration Policies for more information. If you are applying for a Community gTLD, please submit the Community Registration Policies by answering Questions 150-155. However, if you propose to include additional Registry Voluntary Commitments in the RA beyond the Community Registration Policies, you may answer "yes" and proceed to answer the following questions. 4. You are encouraged to consider whether there are other means, separate from including commitment(s) in the Base RA, that could be used to further your business objectives or help resolve any anticipated or actual issue(s) raised regarding the applied-for gTLD string or application. See Section 7.8.3 Registry Voluntary Commitments (RVCs). Notes: If you select “yes” to this question, you are required to pay the conditional Registry Commitments Evaluation fee, and commitments that are approved by ICANN will be included in Specification 11 of the applicable Base RA as specific voluntary public interest commitments as contractual obligations.
No
This question set collects information related to whether the applied-for gTLD string is a .Brand (see Section 7.3) or if the applying entity is seeking a Code of Conduct exemption (see Section 7.4).
Select Yes or No
No
This serves as an indication of intent to apply for an exemption to Specification 9 and that the applying entity is NOT requesting to be designated a .Brand TLD, pursuant to Specification 13.
No
This question set collects any additional information that the applying entity would like to provide, including any supporting materials.
1. An applying entity may use this response field to submit any additional, optional information or documentation that the applying entity believes enhances understanding of its application or may be of interest to the general public. This could include, but is not limited to, the applying entity’s: a) Individual registry policies; b) Separate agreement with a third-party to fulfill certain commitments; c) Terms of use; d) Additional Community Registration Policies not intended for RA inclusion; e) Other materials that clarify the applying entity’s mission, values, or intended use of the gTLD. Notes: 1. This question is optional and for informational purposes only. 2. The information provided here will not be evaluated as part of the application, or be contractually binding on the applying entity. 3. All submissions to this question will be posted for the public to review and comment.
Additional information - reading of the string and scope of the application. .xio is a coined technical abbreviation. It is not a dictionary word and it is not a brand. It is applied for on the reading set out in the response to the mission and purpose question: ""x"" for ""cross"" and ""IO"" for input/output. The applying entity claims no exclusivity over either element, and this application does not seek Specification 13 status or any Code of Conduct exemption. The applying entity notes that a share of the intended registrants build artificial intelligence services. The application does not propose that the Registry Operator assess, certify, approve or regulate those services, and no such capability should be inferred from the string. The Registry function is naming. Conduct at the second level is addressed through the abuse provisions of the Registry Agreement, applicable Consensus Policies and Temporary Policies, and the standard rights protection mechanisms, applied reactively after registration. The applying entity operates the namespace as an open TLD, available to any registrant through any ICANN-accredited registrar, on published and non-discriminatory terms
This question set contains attestations related to the applying entity’s acknowledgment of bona fide intent and prohibited communications.
Confirm the statement using the checkbox.
true
Confirm the statement using the checkbox.
true