CVIP

BGP inherited
Cluster stats
Netblocks11
All fragments 15 blocks across 2 clusters
Cluster ID204954631
RegistryPEERINGDB
Customersfind customers using this network →
Evidence & provenance ?
Attribution BGP parent (inherited)
Shared handles clustered on 5 shared RIR contact/maintainer handles
Registry names 2 distinct registrant names across these blocks
full provenance (JSON) → · how attribution works

Footprint over time

4 weekly snapshots · JSON
11 0 netblocks since 2026-07-05
2026-07-05 peak 11 2026-07-13

IP Ranges (11)

⬇ export CSV
CIDR Org name Registry Status Confidence
185.1.90.86/32 CVIP PEERINGDB ASSIGNED ● high
31.170.43.12/30 CVIP RIPE ASSIGNED PA ● low
78.4.36.88/30 CVIP RIPE ASSIGNED PA ● low
78.4.36.96/29 CVIP RIPE ASSIGNED PA ● low
78.4.103.56/29 CVIP RIPE ASSIGNED PA ● low
78.4.104.80/29 CVIP RIPE ASSIGNED PA ● low
78.4.122.224/29 CVIP RIPE ASSIGNED PA ● low
78.4.134.252/30 CVIP RIPE ASSIGNED PA ● low
78.5.37.48/29 CVIP RIPE ASSIGNED PA ● low
89.118.120.24/30 CVIP RIPE ASSIGNED PA ● low
89.119.36.236/30 CVIP RIPE ASSIGNED PA ● low

Possibly related to this organisation

what's this?
Same name family
Separately-registered clusters whose names share “CVIP” — 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: A how networks compare →
100.0% of checked blocks have valid RPKI ROA coverage (11 of 11)
No discrepancies found among checked blocks.

NIC Handles

ALBACOM-MNT AS199889 BTI-MNT DUMY-RIPE DUMY-RIPE