NL-CUST-PROSERVE-ID-781

BGP inherited

Cluster stats

Netblocks	3
All fragments	194 blocks across 142 clusters
Cluster ID	204861883
Registry	RIPE
Customers	find 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

IP Ranges (3)

⬇ export CSV

CIDR	Org name	Registry	Status	Confidence
81.4.112.152/29	NL-CUST-PROSERVE-ID-781	RIPE	ASSIGNED PA	● low
81.4.112.168/30	NL-CUST-PROSERVE-ID-781	RIPE	ASSIGNED PA	● low
81.4.112.184/30	NL-CUST-PROSERVE-ID-781	RIPE	ASSIGNED PA	● low

Possibly related to this organisation

what's this?

Same name family

Separately-registered clusters whose names share “NL CUST PROSERVE ID” — 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 142 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.

Cust Proserve Id 605 via Signet B.V. sub-allocation
Cust Proserve Routelabel via Signet B.V. sub-allocation
Cust Proserve Id 619 via Signet B.V. sub-allocation
Cust Proserve Id 618 via Signet B.V. sub-allocation
Cust Proserve Id 622 2 via Signet B.V. sub-allocation
Cust Proserve Id 633 via Signet B.V. sub-allocation
Cust Proserve Id 339 via Signet B.V. sub-allocation
Cust Proserve Id 657 via Signet B.V. sub-allocation

Network trust

what's this?

RPKI hygiene: A how networks compare →

100.0% of checked blocks have valid RPKI ROA coverage (3 of 3)

No discrepancies found among checked blocks.

NIC Handles

DUMY-RIPE DUMY-RIPE PROSERVE-MNT