Whilst u/Georgy_K_Zhukov's link provides an excellent answer regarding the plans (or lack thereof) regarding Axis plans for the Americas, I want to touch a bit more on the division of other continents, namely Asia, Africa, and Eastern Europe (the Soviet Union back then). For context: note this scene from the Man in the High Castle TV adaptation, where starting from 0:17 a larger map of the inter-Axis world division (with Italy rather interestingly absent as a member state, and apparently depicted as Third Reich territory) is shown. Focusing on Asia first, let us turn our attention to the fact that in the alternate reality of MitHC, the Indian subcontinent and most of Asia is entirely under Japanese control. How realistic was this in the actual planning of the Axis powers?

Quite accurate actually. Just four days after the outbreak of the Pacific War, representatives of the three Axis powers met in Berlin to discuss (rather curiously) the division of their respective zones of operation (rather than military or even economic cooperation, which was lower down on the order of business). On December 15th 1941, Japanese Ambassador to Germany Oshima presented German Foreign Minister von Ribbentrop with a proposed plan which placed the Indian Ocean as the nucleus of Inter-Axis zones of occupation and operation. In this draft proposal, Tokyo envisioned that the line of longitude of 70°E would be the boundary between the spheres of operation of the Axis powers. Japan was to control and operate in practically all of Asia (including India and most of Siberia), whilst Italy and Germany would have everything to the west of the line, including all of the Middle East and European Russia. The Oberkommando des Heeres (in charge of German military operations in the East) proposed another line, though not too far off of the longitude that the Japanese had proposed themselves. In the OKW counter-proposal, the Japanese would have all of Asia up until the borders of Afghanistan, and all of Siberia up until the Yenisei River, the Germans and Italians would have everything else to the west. Interestingly, the Germans also envisioned that the area between the Volga and the Yenisei would be a "neutral zone", where the free exchange of resources, materiel, and the expulsion of any unwanted peoples from both sides would take place. We have limited and at best unreliable sources to say that this division plan went any further than the drawing board, or that the racial policy was adjusted to include the expulsion of Untermensch beyond the Volga. We do know however, that Hitler responded positively to Oshima's plan, envisioning the advance of Wehrmacht troops as far as Iran and Iraq to threaten India in co-ordination with a Japanese advance from China. This map by Gerhard L. Weinberg in his book Visions of Victory: The Hopes of Eight WWII Leaders is a better illustration of the two division plans. Thus the map seen in MitHC is not too far off, except for the omission of Italy and the larger neutral zone in Central Asia.

What about Africa then? In MitHC the entirety of Africa is shown as under Nazi possession, and that may not have been too far off the mark either in terms of Nazi visions. There had been a propaganda campaign which echoed a colonial revisionism between 1936-1937, with posters depicting the Third Reich regaining control of all the former German colonies pre-Versailles, though beyond the North Africa campaign there seems to have been no concrete military plans to direct the Afrikakorps southward once the British and French forces had been defeated. There were however, economic plans (if they can be called as such) to transform Africa into a key economic and labour asset of the Nazi policy. The Arbeitswissenschaftliche Institut (Labour Sciences Institute) of the German Labour Front went so far as to envision re-settlement plans across the African continent, and the possibility of recruiting African labourers to man the Nazi economic apparatus. I will not go into too much depth about such economic plans (Karsten Linne does this to an excellent extent in their work linked below), but these visions do definitely speak of German plans (if never put on paper) to colonise (though in what way and to what extent remains unknown) all of Africa as a resource for labour and industry.

So to sum, the alternative reality in which the Axis (with Italy somehow missing) divided up the world into three zones is fairly accurate in terms of planning between the Germans and Japanese with regards to Asia, and at the very least a plausibility with the Germans in Africa.

Sources

Hauner, Milan. "Did Hitler Want a World Dominion?" Journal of Contemporary History 13, no. 1 (1978): 15-32. Accessed February 21, 2021. http://www.jstor.org/stable/260090.

Linne, Karsten. "The "New Labour Policy" in Nazi Colonial Planning for Africa." International Review of Social History 49, no. 2 (2004): 197-224. Accessed February 21, 2021. http://www.jstor.org/stable/44583437.

Kamenetsky, Ihor. "Lebensraum in Hitler's War Plan: The Theory and the Eastern European Reality." The American Journal of Economics and Sociology 20, no. 3 (1961): 313-26. Accessed February 21, 2021. http://www.jstor.org/stable/3484695.

Kowner, Rotem. “When Economics, Strategy, and Racial Ideology Meet: Inter-Axis Connections in the Wartime Indian Ocean.” Journal of Global History 12, no. 2 (2017): 228–50. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1740022817000067.

Michaelis, Meir. "World Power Status or World Dominion? A Survey of the Literature on Hitler's 'Plan of World Dominion' (1937-1970)." The Historical Journal 15, no. 2 (1972): 331-60. Accessed February 21, 2021. http://www.jstor.org/stable/2638127.

Very little concrete plans existed for the Americas. This is covered some in this older answer.