IGF
iShares Global Infrastructure ETF
Mentions (24Hr)
-100.00% Today
Reddit Posts
Tipranks' "Perfect 10" list: two top-rated stocks potentially undervalued by 90%
Imugene Ltd. [OTC: IUGNF], [ASX: IMU] - Well funded, developing a range of new treatments that activate cancer patients' own immune system to identify and eradicate tumors.
FYI: Today J.P. Morgan posted their 2022 Long-Term Capital Market Assumptions
Mentions
Quick scan of ETFs for the defense companies below. EUAD has all of these. I personally hold EUAD, SHLD, IGF, EMIF for global exposure to defense and infrastructure. * **Rheinmetall** – in EUAD & WDEF * **BAE Systems** – in EUAD & WDEF * **Thales** – in EUAD & WDEF * **Saab** – in EUAD & WDEF * **Rolls-Royce** – in EUAD The others mentioned in this thread here are probably in a European industrials basket. Going to look into that.
I would look at $VT. If you invest world stock ETF you are going to get more industrials, materials, etc b/c unlike US stocks, world indices lean more to non tech stocks. Plus you still get US tech stocks. Now that is the smart move. If you want to play around w/ 25% then I've been buying gold, $EWY (South Korea), $EWJ (Japan), $IGF (world infrastructure), $TLT (US Treasuries), $XLU (utilities). But $VT might be the best if you are looking to diversify now.
Im about 50/50 at the moment. 50% inflation hedges like GNR and IGF. 50% cash. Normally id be 100% SPY or voo. But this shit isnt right. Im not risking 300k on 7 fucking companies.
Buy the picks & shovels over $NVDA. I like $CAT and $DE but they ain't cheap. $IGF and $XLU which I also own are less riskier ETF's.
$IGF. I have no fricking idea which infrastructure stocks will outperform. But this ETF has Global energy, industrials, and utilities holdings including pipelines. The fund even has 2% holding in Auckland International Airport Limited. I know I'm cheating on a stock reddit going w/ ETF.
I've done a lot of buying today. I've bought $EWJ, $EWY, $IGF, $DE, and $WNC. I sold 10% of my Gold ($PHYS) position to pay for the positions above. This is more of a rebalancing as Gold had appreciated to over 25% of my port. I'm still very bullish on Gold, but I never like seeing my port having over 25% concentration in any stock or asset. I see too many stressful over concentration posts here daily from the reddit tech bros.
There is a very good possibility you are correct. But I like to hedge my port. $TLT, $PHYS (GOLD) make up roughly 50% of my port. $EWJ, $EWY, $XLU and $IGF make up roughly 25%. Then individual stocks that are non tech make up last 25%. $EWY could be cut in half and it wouldn't really hurt my overall port. South Korea AI stocks are a hedge in case I am wrong about AI and it is the financial game changer that many believe it is. I would just rather buy the non hype non US AI stocks vs US AI over hyped bubble stocks.
$EWJ and $PHYS are keeping my port green today. Gawd bless Japan & Gold. I'm looking at a Global infrastructure ETF $IGF next. What I like about $IGF is that it includes US & Global stocks. And of course if the $EWY falls a bit more I'll be adding there too. Buy what's going up, NOT the stocks & ETF's you WANT to see go up. If you follow the money you have higher odds of making money.
What is your source of 35,000 job loss? There is nothing in google other than the one plant that moved. So: the numbers don't add up plus * **GM (Oshawa):** Hundreds to potentially 2,000 jobs affected (assembly & suppliers) due to shift cuts, impacting [workers and suppliers](https://www.ipolitics.ca/2025/10/23/canadas-auto-sector-is-under-attack-if-we-dont-fight-back-now-it-will-be-gone-not-just-in-brampton-but-across-canada/). * **Stellantis (Windsor/Brampton):** Temporary shutdowns impacting thousands of workers and suppliers (like 4,500 workers in Windsor) due to tariffs, affecting the broader supply chain. * [**CAMI**](https://www.google.com/search?q=CAMI&sca_esv=dd02f7078e0836d1&ei=5mlqaeerBtXTp84P__uzyQY&ved=2ahUKEwj2l8v1v5CSAxX_4skDHdmiL8EQgK4QegQIAxAG&uact=5&oq=how+many+jobs+were+lost+auto+industry+canada&gs_lp=Egxnd3Mtd2l6LXNlcnAiLGhvdyBtYW55IGpvYnMgd2VyZSBsb3N0IGF1dG8gaW5kdXN0cnkgY2FuYWRhMgcQIRigARgKMgUQIRifBTIFECEYnwUyBRAhGJ8FMgUQIRifBTIFECEYnwVItAtQigVYwApwAXgBkAEAmAGlAaAB2AaqAQMwLja4AQPIAQD4AQGYAgegAvsGwgIKEAAYsAMY1gQYR8ICBRAhGKABmAMAiAYBkAYFkgcDMS42oAfjHLIHAzAuNrgH9gbCBwUwLjMuNMgHEoAIAA&sclient=gws-wiz-serp) **(Ingersoll):** Around 500 jobs lost as production shifted south. * **Parts Suppliers:** Significant job losses, with one supplier ([TFT](https://www.google.com/search?q=TFT&sca_esv=dd02f7078e0836d1&ei=5mlqaeerBtXTp84P__uzyQY&ved=2ahUKEwj2l8v1v5CSAxX_4skDHdmiL8EQgK4QegQIAxAI&uact=5&oq=how+many+jobs+were+lost+auto+industry+canada&gs_lp=Egxnd3Mtd2l6LXNlcnAiLGhvdyBtYW55IGpvYnMgd2VyZSBsb3N0IGF1dG8gaW5kdXN0cnkgY2FuYWRhMgcQIRigARgKMgUQIRifBTIFECEYnwUyBRAhGJ8FMgUQIRifBTIFECEYnwVItAtQigVYwApwAXgBkAEAmAGlAaAB2AaqAQMwLja4AQPIAQD4AQGYAgegAvsGwgIKEAAYsAMY1gQYR8ICBRAhGKABmAMAiAYBkAYFkgcDMS42oAfjHLIHAzAuNrgH9gbCBwUwLjMuNMgHEoAIAA&sclient=gws-wiz-serp) Global) cutting 250 jobs in Oshawa alone.
My portfolio is currently split with about 30% in VT, 10% in IGF, 10% in IEMG, 3% in GUNR, 15% in MTUM, 5% in VNQ, 10% in GLD, 15% in QQQ, 1% in EWX, and 1% in ARKW. I’d recommend putting this in ChatGPT just ask it to analyse it when it performs when it struggles through different economic situations and pros and cons of this then make a opinion
Did you understand what you read? Probably not. All cows have IGF-1 in their milk. It's naturally occurring. Insulin-Like Growth Hormone is part of the calving process. So if you drink early milk from calving it's going to have high concentrations of it. In the US since they use rbST they have this concentration at all times. That is to say, all milk is in some way carcinogenic. As your link says: "Research on the link between rBST and breast cancer has produced mixed results, and more study is needed to evaluate the potential association." That is to say, the peer reviewed research shows that rbST leads to both higher rates of cancer than just drinking milk without it, and also normal levels. Like [this](https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10552-010-9615-5) study actually shows that increased dairy consumption reduces breast cancer risks (65,000 women included in the study). And that's a study that was conducted before rbST was banned in Europe. Just to give you an idea, there's no conclusive information saying that this is going to be bad for you. In the least, not any worse for you than what we do in Canada. Are you going to read this and stop drinking Canadian milk because it might be too close to calving? Probably not.
**The United States does not require companies to label the use of rBST** in their products, although it was banned in the European Union in 1990. The use of rBST in dairy cows has been shown to increase the concentrations of IGF-1, a protein naturally found in milk. Though research is mixed on the extent to which dairy consumption is linked to increased cancer risk, **higher blood levels of IGF-1 have been linked to increased risk for pre-menopausal breast cancer.** [source ](https://www.bcpp.org/resource/rbgh-rbst/)
https://www.reddit.com/r/WallStreetBetsSuper/s/IGF444ekM8
Suction pump while flaccid. DHT cream rub, IGF1-des(localized fragment) injection into the 3 sponge tissues and then pump and cockring, HCG injections to counteract DHT shutting down gonads, and HGH won't hurt(or a research chem version). It worked for me. 6 to 8, but i topped out the pump, so i stopped, and it went back to normal. Gotta keep at it for over a month, cuz thats all i did for those 2 inches, and tight skin makes it hard to grow and jeep, so a phimosis silicone foreskin regrowing kit, WITH one of those curve corrector and lengthening brackets should both work together to stretch the skin so the gains get kept. I'm gonna make a video series on it, but need to find a transdermal IGF1-des, that makes it into the sponge tissue, and how to prove it. Be a few years before it's on the market, if it's even doable. People don't like pinning their member, i would assume. I got a new 12" pump now, too. Kinda glad it back to normal for the future video series gains.
Good morning all. I'd love your opinion on my allocation below. Thank you. **$USD** || || |VOO|20%| |VXUS|13%| |EEM|13%| |BND|15%| |TIP|10%| |ICLN|7.5%| |IYH|7.5%| |IGF|15%| **$CAD** || || |XIC|20%| |VXC|25%| |XBB|15%| |XRB|10%| |XRE|15%| |XGD|15%| |||
That's not HGH that does that, it's IGF1.
I eat a box just before I shoot my IGF-1.
Yes I thought my comment emphasized the high quality doctor oversight part. Besides, hormone optimization can be much more than testosterone replacement therapy. The sky is the limit when adding in growth hormone, neurosteroids like DHEA and pregnenolone, IGF1 and HCG to name a few. The expensive part isn't necessarily the compounds, but the professionals behind creating a custom tailored panel for the individual with follow up tests and adjustments
Disclaimer: I'm not vegan. How exactly is it less healthy than real meal - like do you actually know or is this just parroted off of something you read? Over 90% of human dioxin exposure is through meat, meat contains heme iron which has been flagged as a carcinogen by the WHO, meat raises IGF-1 levels, heterocyclic amines, high concentrations of sulfur-containing amino acids like methionine, etc. Again, I eat meat I just don't know how you determined Beyond Meat is bad for health markers
David Sinclair at Harvard has studied and spoken extensively about insulin, IGF-1 and much more sensible ways to slow aging inside and out. It’s all a very new field and his approaches are still considered mostly novel. But damn, for a guy in his 50s he is looking pretty good.
It does. It partially blocks IGF-1. If you look up Moreplatesmoredates and vigorousSteve on YouTube, they tend to agree the tradeoff is worth it to balance muscle building and longevity. For those who don't have access to Metformin - Berberine is a near substitute.
The True Ape, permanently cash restricted? Boy out here launching IGF violations left and right?
> I would say the easiest way would be inserting IGF-1. Better hurry, already tons of patents dealing with IGF-1.
I wish. mRNA patents have to be actual gene sequences. Although if I was a gambling man...which I am. I would say the easiest way would be inserting IGF-1. Also it would make kids taller before their growth plates close.
According to him he didn’t use GH for long and has now tried IGF-1 to see how it works
bro sorry to stalk you but could you please dm source for IGF DES. Pretty please thanks.
Nope. Cholesterol, carcinogens, and IGF-1 among other issues.
IGF looks like a dumpster ETF, not to be a dick
💵 Hunter bought CLF, CAT, GE, HAL and DE options and YOLO'd IGF ETF yesterday and will sell all of it Monday 💵
It’s not as much about the sodium and fat as it is about the cholesterol (leads to heart disease, top cause of death) and animal protein (raise IGF-1, leads to cancer). Of course the sodium is not good. A great book about this stuff is [How Not to Die](https://www.amazon.com/How-Not-Die-Discover-Scientifically-ebook/dp/B00Y7USB14)
No, i mean a infrastructure fund etf like IGF and IFRA or maybe BAM, BIP, or BIPC since your Canadian.
I watched this video because of my child. IGF looks promising treatment for Rhett , PMS and other neurodegenerative disorder. The Scientist is from $NURPF Neuren but somewhere I believe $ACAD is involved. https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=0au4xCLSSNM
IFRA IGF Good plays still?
IGF comes to mind (ETF)
Here is my suspicion IANA was established informally as a reference to various technical functions for the ARPANET, that Jon Postel and Joyce K. Reynolds performed at the University of California at Los Angeles (UCLA) and at the University of Southern California's Information Sciences Institute. On March 26, 1972, Vint Cerf and Jon Postel at UCLA called for establishing a socket number catalog in RFC 322. Network administrators were asked to submit a note or place a phone call, "describing the function and socket numbers of network service programs at each HOST".\[19\] This catalog was subsequently published as RFC 433 in December 1972.\[20\] In it Postel first proposed a registry of assignments of port numbers to network services, calling himself the czar of socket numbers.\[21\]The first reference to the name "IANA" in the RFC series is in RFC 1083, published in December, 1988 by Postel at USC-ISI, referring to Joyce K. Reynolds as the IANA contact. However the function, and the term, was well established long before that; RFC 1174 says that "Throughout its entire history, the Internet system has employed a central Internet Assigned Numbers Authority (IANA)..."\[22\]In 1995, the National Science Foundation authorized Network Solutions to assess domain name registrants a $50 fee per year for the first two years, 30 percent of which was to be deposited in the Intellectual Infrastructure Fund (IIF), a fund to be used for the preservation and enhancement of the intellectual infrastructure of the Internet.\[23\] There was widespread dissatisfaction with this concentration of power (and money) in one company, and people looked to IANA for a solution. Postel wrote up a draft\[24\] on IANA and the creation of new top level domains. He was trying to institutionalize IANA. In retrospect, this would have been valuable, since he unexpectedly died about two years later.In January 1998, Postel was threatened by US Presidential science advisor Ira Magaziner with the statement "You'll never work on the Internet again" after Postel collaborated with root server operators to test using a root server other than Network Solutions' "A" root to act as the authority over the root zone. Demonstrating that control of the root was from the IANA rather than from Network Solutions would have clarified IANA's authority to create new top-level domains as a step to resolving the DNS Wars, but he ended his effort after Magaziner's threat, and died not long after.\[25\]\[26\]Jon Postel managed the IANA function from its inception on the ARPANET until his death in October 1998. By his almost 30 years of "selfless service",\[27\] Postel created his de facto authority to manage key parts of the Internet infrastructure. After his death, Joyce K. Reynolds, who had worked with him for many years, managed the transition of the IANA function to ICANN.Starting in 1988, IANA was funded by the U.S. government under a contract between the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency and the Information Sciences Institute. This contract expired in April 1997, but was extended to preserve IANA.\[28\]On December 24, 1998, USC entered into a transition agreement with the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers ICANN, transferring the IANA project to ICANN, effective January 1, 1999, thus making IANA an operating unit of ICANN.\[29\]In June 1999, at its Oslo meeting, IETF signed an agreement with ICANN concerning the tasks that IANA would perform for the IETF; this is published as RFC 2860.\[30\]On February 8, 2000, the Department of Commerce entered into an agreement with ICANN for ICANN to perform the IANA functions.\[31\]On October 7, 2013 the Montevideo Statement on the Future of Internet Cooperation was released by the leaders of a number of organizations involved in coordinating the Internet's global technical infrastructure, loosely known as the "I\*" (or "I-star") group. Among other things, the statement "expressed strong concern over the undermining of the trust and confidence of Internet users globally due to recent revelations of pervasive monitoring and surveillance" and "called for accelerating the globalization of ICANN and IANA functions, towards an environment in which all stakeholders, including all governments, participate on an equal footing". This desire to move away from a United States centric approach is seen as a reaction to the ongoing NSA surveillance scandal. The statement was signed by the heads of the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN), the Internet Engineering Task Force, the Internet Architecture Board, the World Wide Web Consortium, the Internet Society, and the five regional Internet address registries (African Network Information Center, American Registry for Internet Numbers, Asia-Pacific Network Information Centre, Latin America and Caribbean Internet Addresses Registry, and Réseaux IP Européens Network Coordination Centre).\[32\]\[33\]\[34\]In October 2013, Fadi Chehadé, current President and CEO of ICANN, met with Brazilian President Dilma Rousseff in Brasilia. Upon Chehadé's invitation, the two announced that Brazil would host an international summit on Internet governance in April 2014.\[35\] The announcement came after the 2013 disclosures of mass surveillance by the U.S. government, and President Rousseff's speech at the opening session of the 2013 United Nations General Assembly, where she strongly criticized the American surveillance program as a "breach of international law". The "Global Multistakeholder Meeting on the Future of Internet Governance (NET mundial)" will include representatives of government, industry, civil society, and academia.\[citation needed\] At the IGF VIII meeting in Bali in October 2013 a commenter noted that Brazil intends the meeting to be a "summit" in the sense that it will be high level with decision-making authority.\[36\] The organizers of the "NET mundial" meeting have decided that an online forum called "/1net", set up by the I\* group, will be a major conduit of non-governmental input into the three committees preparing for the meeting in April.\[34\]\[37\]\[38\]In April 2014 the NetMundial Initiative, a plan for international governance of the Internet, was proposed at the Global Multistakeholder Meeting on the Future of Internet Governance (GMMFIG) conference (23–24 April 2014)\[39\]\[40\]\[41\] and later developed into the NetMundial Initiative by ICANN CEO Fadi Chehade along with representatives of the World Economic Forum (WEF)\[42\] and the Brazilian Internet Steering Committee (Comitê Gestor da Internet no Brasil), commonly referred to as "CGI.br".\[43\]The meeting produced a nonbinding statement in favor of consensus-based decision-making. It reflected a compromise and did not harshly condemn mass surveillance or include the words "net neutrality", despite initial support for that from Brazil. The final resolution says ICANN should be under international control by September 2015.\[44\] A minority of governments, including Russia, China, Iran and India, were unhappy with the final resolution and wanted multi-lateral management for the Internet, rather than broader multi-stakeholder management.\[45\]A month later, the Panel On Global Internet Cooperation and Governance Mechanisms (convened by the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) and the World Economic Forum (WEF) with assistance from The Annenberg Foundation), supported and included the NetMundial statement in its own report.\[46\]
I have a suspicion IANA was established informally as a reference to various technical functions for the ARPANET, that Jon Postel and Joyce K. Reynolds performed at the University of California at Los Angeles (UCLA) and at the University of Southern California's Information Sciences Institute. On March 26, 1972, Vint Cerf and Jon Postel at UCLA called for establishing a socket number catalog in RFC 322. Network administrators were asked to submit a note or place a phone call, "describing the function and socket numbers of network service programs at each HOST".\[19\] This catalog was subsequently published as RFC 433 in December 1972.\[20\] In it Postel first proposed a registry of assignments of port numbers to network services, calling himself the czar of socket numbers.\[21\]The first reference to the name "IANA" in the RFC series is in RFC 1083, published in December, 1988 by Postel at USC-ISI, referring to Joyce K. Reynolds as the IANA contact. However the function, and the term, was well established long before that; RFC 1174 says that "Throughout its entire history, the Internet system has employed a central Internet Assigned Numbers Authority (IANA)..."\[22\]In 1995, the National Science Foundation authorized Network Solutions to assess domain name registrants a $50 fee per year for the first two years, 30 percent of which was to be deposited in the Intellectual Infrastructure Fund (IIF), a fund to be used for the preservation and enhancement of the intellectual infrastructure of the Internet.\[23\] There was widespread dissatisfaction with this concentration of power (and money) in one company, and people looked to IANA for a solution. Postel wrote up a draft\[24\] on IANA and the creation of new top level domains. He was trying to institutionalize IANA. In retrospect, this would have been valuable, since he unexpectedly died about two years later.In January 1998, Postel was threatened by US Presidential science advisor Ira Magaziner with the statement "You'll never work on the Internet again" after Postel collaborated with root server operators to test using a root server other than Network Solutions' "A" root to act as the authority over the root zone. Demonstrating that control of the root was from the IANA rather than from Network Solutions would have clarified IANA's authority to create new top-level domains as a step to resolving the DNS Wars, but he ended his effort after Magaziner's threat, and died not long after.\[25\]\[26\]Jon Postel managed the IANA function from its inception on the ARPANET until his death in October 1998. By his almost 30 years of "selfless service",\[27\] Postel created his de facto authority to manage key parts of the Internet infrastructure. After his death, Joyce K. Reynolds, who had worked with him for many years, managed the transition of the IANA function to ICANN.Starting in 1988, IANA was funded by the U.S. government under a contract between the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency and the Information Sciences Institute. This contract expired in April 1997, but was extended to preserve IANA.\[28\]On December 24, 1998, USC entered into a transition agreement with the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers ICANN, transferring the IANA project to ICANN, effective January 1, 1999, thus making IANA an operating unit of ICANN.\[29\]In June 1999, at its Oslo meeting, IETF signed an agreement with ICANN concerning the tasks that IANA would perform for the IETF; this is published as RFC 2860.\[30\]On February 8, 2000, the Department of Commerce entered into an agreement with ICANN for ICANN to perform the IANA functions.\[31\]On October 7, 2013 the Montevideo Statement on the Future of Internet Cooperation was released by the leaders of a number of organizations involved in coordinating the Internet's global technical infrastructure, loosely known as the "I\*" (or "I-star") group. Among other things, the statement "expressed strong concern over the undermining of the trust and confidence of Internet users globally due to recent revelations of pervasive monitoring and surveillance" and "called for accelerating the globalization of ICANN and IANA functions, towards an environment in which all stakeholders, including all governments, participate on an equal footing". This desire to move away from a United States centric approach is seen as a reaction to the ongoing NSA surveillance scandal. The statement was signed by the heads of the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN), the Internet Engineering Task Force, the Internet Architecture Board, the World Wide Web Consortium, the Internet Society, and the five regional Internet address registries (African Network Information Center, American Registry for Internet Numbers, Asia-Pacific Network Information Centre, Latin America and Caribbean Internet Addresses Registry, and Réseaux IP Européens Network Coordination Centre).\[32\]\[33\]\[34\]In October 2013, Fadi Chehadé, current President and CEO of ICANN, met with Brazilian President Dilma Rousseff in Brasilia. Upon Chehadé's invitation, the two announced that Brazil would host an international summit on Internet governance in April 2014.\[35\] The announcement came after the 2013 disclosures of mass surveillance by the U.S. government, and President Rousseff's speech at the opening session of the 2013 United Nations General Assembly, where she strongly criticized the American surveillance program as a "breach of international law". The "Global Multistakeholder Meeting on the Future of Internet Governance (NET mundial)" will include representatives of government, industry, civil society, and academia.\[citation needed\] At the IGF VIII meeting in Bali in October 2013 a commenter noted that Brazil intends the meeting to be a "summit" in the sense that it will be high level with decision-making authority.\[36\] The organizers of the "NET mundial" meeting have decided that an online forum called "/1net", set up by the I\* group, will be a major conduit of non-governmental input into the three committees preparing for the meeting in April.\[34\]\[37\]\[38\]In April 2014 the NetMundial Initiative, a plan for international governance of the Internet, was proposed at the Global Multistakeholder Meeting on the Future of Internet Governance (GMMFIG) conference (23–24 April 2014)\[39\]\[40\]\[41\] and later developed into the NetMundial Initiative by ICANN CEO Fadi Chehade along with representatives of the World Economic Forum (WEF)\[42\] and the Brazilian Internet Steering Committee (Comitê Gestor da Internet no Brasil), commonly referred to as "CGI.br".\[43\]The meeting produced a nonbinding statement in favor of consensus-based decision-making. It reflected a compromise and did not harshly condemn mass surveillance or include the words "net neutrality", despite initial support for that from Brazil. The final resolution says ICANN should be under international control by September 2015.\[44\] A minority of governments, including Russia, China, Iran and India, were unhappy with the final resolution and wanted multi-lateral management for the Internet, rather than broader multi-stakeholder management.\[45\]A month later, the Panel On Global Internet Cooperation and Governance Mechanisms (convened by the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) and the World Economic Forum (WEF) with assistance from The Annenberg Foundation), supported and included the NetMundial statement in its own report.\[46\]
I want to see the 3rd one IANA was established informally as a reference to various technical functions for the ARPANET, that Jon Postel and Joyce K. Reynolds performed at the University of California at Los Angeles (UCLA) and at the University of Southern California's Information Sciences Institute. On March 26, 1972, Vint Cerf and Jon Postel at UCLA called for establishing a socket number catalog in RFC 322. Network administrators were asked to submit a note or place a phone call, "describing the function and socket numbers of network service programs at each HOST".\[19\] This catalog was subsequently published as RFC 433 in December 1972.\[20\] In it Postel first proposed a registry of assignments of port numbers to network services, calling himself the czar of socket numbers.\[21\]The first reference to the name "IANA" in the RFC series is in RFC 1083, published in December, 1988 by Postel at USC-ISI, referring to Joyce K. Reynolds as the IANA contact. However the function, and the term, was well established long before that; RFC 1174 says that "Throughout its entire history, the Internet system has employed a central Internet Assigned Numbers Authority (IANA)..."\[22\]In 1995, the National Science Foundation authorized Network Solutions to assess domain name registrants a $50 fee per year for the first two years, 30 percent of which was to be deposited in the Intellectual Infrastructure Fund (IIF), a fund to be used for the preservation and enhancement of the intellectual infrastructure of the Internet.\[23\] There was widespread dissatisfaction with this concentration of power (and money) in one company, and people looked to IANA for a solution. Postel wrote up a draft\[24\] on IANA and the creation of new top level domains. He was trying to institutionalize IANA. In retrospect, this would have been valuable, since he unexpectedly died about two years later.In January 1998, Postel was threatened by US Presidential science advisor Ira Magaziner with the statement "You'll never work on the Internet again" after Postel collaborated with root server operators to test using a root server other than Network Solutions' "A" root to act as the authority over the root zone. Demonstrating that control of the root was from the IANA rather than from Network Solutions would have clarified IANA's authority to create new top-level domains as a step to resolving the DNS Wars, but he ended his effort after Magaziner's threat, and died not long after.\[25\]\[26\]Jon Postel managed the IANA function from its inception on the ARPANET until his death in October 1998. By his almost 30 years of "selfless service",\[27\] Postel created his de facto authority to manage key parts of the Internet infrastructure. After his death, Joyce K. Reynolds, who had worked with him for many years, managed the transition of the IANA function to ICANN.Starting in 1988, IANA was funded by the U.S. government under a contract between the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency and the Information Sciences Institute. This contract expired in April 1997, but was extended to preserve IANA.\[28\]On December 24, 1998, USC entered into a transition agreement with the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers ICANN, transferring the IANA project to ICANN, effective January 1, 1999, thus making IANA an operating unit of ICANN.\[29\]In June 1999, at its Oslo meeting, IETF signed an agreement with ICANN concerning the tasks that IANA would perform for the IETF; this is published as RFC 2860.\[30\]On February 8, 2000, the Department of Commerce entered into an agreement with ICANN for ICANN to perform the IANA functions.\[31\]On October 7, 2013 the Montevideo Statement on the Future of Internet Cooperation was released by the leaders of a number of organizations involved in coordinating the Internet's global technical infrastructure, loosely known as the "I\*" (or "I-star") group. Among other things, the statement "expressed strong concern over the undermining of the trust and confidence of Internet users globally due to recent revelations of pervasive monitoring and surveillance" and "called for accelerating the globalization of ICANN and IANA functions, towards an environment in which all stakeholders, including all governments, participate on an equal footing". This desire to move away from a United States centric approach is seen as a reaction to the ongoing NSA surveillance scandal. The statement was signed by the heads of the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN), the Internet Engineering Task Force, the Internet Architecture Board, the World Wide Web Consortium, the Internet Society, and the five regional Internet address registries (African Network Information Center, American Registry for Internet Numbers, Asia-Pacific Network Information Centre, Latin America and Caribbean Internet Addresses Registry, and Réseaux IP Européens Network Coordination Centre).\[32\]\[33\]\[34\]In October 2013, Fadi Chehadé, current President and CEO of ICANN, met with Brazilian President Dilma Rousseff in Brasilia. Upon Chehadé's invitation, the two announced that Brazil would host an international summit on Internet governance in April 2014.\[35\] The announcement came after the 2013 disclosures of mass surveillance by the U.S. government, and President Rousseff's speech at the opening session of the 2013 United Nations General Assembly, where she strongly criticized the American surveillance program as a "breach of international law". The "Global Multistakeholder Meeting on the Future of Internet Governance (NET mundial)" will include representatives of government, industry, civil society, and academia.\[citation needed\] At the IGF VIII meeting in Bali in October 2013 a commenter noted that Brazil intends the meeting to be a "summit" in the sense that it will be high level with decision-making authority.\[36\] The organizers of the "NET mundial" meeting have decided that an online forum called "/1net", set up by the I\* group, will be a major conduit of non-governmental input into the three committees preparing for the meeting in April.\[34\]\[37\]\[38\]In April 2014 the NetMundial Initiative, a plan for international governance of the Internet, was proposed at the Global Multistakeholder Meeting on the Future of Internet Governance (GMMFIG) conference (23–24 April 2014)\[39\]\[40\]\[41\] and later developed into the NetMundial Initiative by ICANN CEO Fadi Chehade along with representatives of the World Economic Forum (WEF)\[42\] and the Brazilian Internet Steering Committee (Comitê Gestor da Internet no Brasil), commonly referred to as "CGI.br".\[43\]The meeting produced a nonbinding statement in favor of consensus-based decision-making. It reflected a compromise and did not harshly condemn mass surveillance or include the words "net neutrality", despite initial support for that from Brazil. The final resolution says ICANN should be under international control by September 2015.\[44\] A minority of governments, including Russia, China, Iran and India, were unhappy with the final resolution and wanted multi-lateral management for the Internet, rather than broader multi-stakeholder management.\[45\]A month later, the Panel On Global Internet Cooperation and Governance Mechanisms (convened by the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) and the World Economic Forum (WEF) with assistance from The Annenberg Foundation), supported and included the NetMundial statement in its own report.\[46\]