ICO-CUST-SWR

BGP inherited
Cluster stats
Netblocks10
All fragments 228 blocks across 110 clusters
Cluster ID208797587
RegistryRIPE
Customersfind customers using this network →
Evidence & provenance ?
Attribution BGP parent (inherited)
Shared handles clustered on 4 shared RIR contact/maintainer handles
Registry names 1 distinct registrant name across these blocks
full provenance (JSON) → · how attribution works

Footprint over time

5 weekly snapshots · JSON
10 0 netblocks since 2026-07-05
2026-07-05 peak 10 2026-07-19

IP Ranges (10)

⬇ export CSV
CIDR Org name Registry Status Confidence
185.104.136.48/32 ICO-CUST-SWR RIPE ASSIGNED PA ● low
217.65.134.41/32 ICO-CUST-SWR RIPE ASSIGNED PA ● low
217.65.134.42/32 ICO-CUST-SWR RIPE ASSIGNED PA ● low
217.65.134.43/32 ICO-CUST-SWR RIPE ASSIGNED PA ● low
217.65.134.44/32 ICO-CUST-SWR RIPE ASSIGNED PA ● low
217.65.134.70/32 ICO-CUST-SWR RIPE ASSIGNED PA ● low
217.65.134.73/32 ICO-CUST-SWR RIPE ASSIGNED PA ● low
217.65.134.74/32 ICO-CUST-SWR RIPE ASSIGNED PA ● low
217.65.134.75/32 ICO-CUST-SWR RIPE ASSIGNED PA ● low
217.65.134.113/32 ICO-CUST-SWR RIPE ASSIGNED PA ● low

Possibly related to this organisation

what's this?
Same name family
Separately-registered clusters whose names share “ICO CUST” — 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 110 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: F how networks compare →
10.0% of checked blocks have valid RPKI ROA coverage (1 of 10)
No discrepancies found among checked blocks.

NIC Handles

DUMY-RIPE DUMY-RIPE se-icomera-1-mnt se-icomera-netops-mnt