E-SHELTER

BGP inherited
Cluster stats
Netblocks9
All fragments 35 blocks across 10 clusters
Cluster ID204537927
RegistryRIPE
Customersfind customers using this network →
Evidence & provenance ?
Attribution BGP parent (inherited)
Shared handles clustered on 5 shared RIR contact/maintainer handles
Registry names 1 distinct registrant name across these blocks
full provenance (JSON) → · how attribution works

Footprint over time

4 weekly snapshots · JSON
9 0 netblocks since 2026-07-05
2026-07-05 peak 9 2026-07-13

IP Ranges (9)

⬇ export CSV
CIDR Org name Registry Status Confidence
62.67.48.128/26 E-SHELTER RIPE ASSIGNED PA ● low
185.138.142.224/28 E-SHELTER RIPE ASSIGNED PA ● low
185.138.143.36/30 E-SHELTER RIPE ASSIGNED PA ● low
185.138.143.144/30 E-SHELTER RIPE ASSIGNED PA ● low
195.122.159.96/28 E-SHELTER RIPE ASSIGNED PA ● low
195.122.167.128/26 E-SHELTER RIPE ASSIGNED PA ● low
212.162.0.112/28 E-SHELTER RIPE ASSIGNED PA ● low
2a07:e80:0:16::/64 E-SHELTER RIPE ASSIGNED ● low
2a07:e80:0:21::/64 E-SHELTER RIPE ASSIGNED ● low

Possibly related to this organisation

what's this?
Same name family
Separately-registered clusters whose names share “E SHELTER” — often per-country or per-system registrations of the same brand, occasionally a different organisation sharing the name. Not counted in this organisation's own footprint.
Combined view of all 10 name-family clusters →
Sub-allocations under carriers
IP blocks an ISP reassigned to a similarly-named customer — decoded from the ISP's own naming convention, not a direct registration.

Network trust

what's this?
RPKI hygiene: C how networks compare →
55.6% of checked blocks have valid RPKI ROA coverage (5 of 9)
No discrepancies found among checked blocks.

NIC Handles

CGRD-RIPE DUMY-RIPE DUMY-RIPE ESHELTER-MNT LEVEL3-MNT