CZ-GTT-INTERFACES-NETS

BGP inherited
Cluster stats
Netblocks8 · 1,912 IPv4 addresses
All fragments 9 blocks across 2 clusters
Cluster ID204566487
RegistryRIPE
Customersfind customers using this network →
Evidence & provenance ?
Attribution BGP parent (inherited)
Shared handles clustered on 3 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
8 0 netblocks since 2026-07-05
2026-07-05 peak 8 2026-07-13

IP Ranges (8)

⬇ export CSV
CIDR Org name Registry Status Confidence
194.183.100.0/24 CZ-GTT-INTERFACES-NETS RIPE ASSIGNED PA ● low
195.7.204.0/24 CZ-GTT-INTERFACES-NETS RIPE ASSIGNED PA ● low
195.7.206.0/24 CZ-GTT-INTERFACES-NETS RIPE ASSIGNED PA ● low
195.81.119.0/24 CZ-GTT-INTERFACES-NETS RIPE ASSIGNED PA ● low
195.81.127.0/24 CZ-GTT-INTERFACES-NETS RIPE ASSIGNED PA ● low
212.23.50.128/25 CZ-GTT-INTERFACES-NETS RIPE ASSIGNED PA ● low
213.251.24.0/24 CZ-GTT-INTERFACES-NETS RIPE ASSIGNED PA ● low
213.251.26.0/24 CZ-GTT-INTERFACES-NETS RIPE ASSIGNED PA ● low

Possibly related to this organisation

what's this?
Same name family
Separately-registered clusters whose names share “CZ GTT INTERFACES” — 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.
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: D how networks compare →
25.0% of checked blocks have valid RPKI ROA coverage (2 of 8)
No discrepancies found among checked blocks.

NIC Handles

AS3257-NET-MNT DUMY-RIPE DUMY-RIPE