Skip to main content

AS28891

CITTEL

CJSC City Telecom

Registry

Authoritative registration data

AS number
28891
Name
CITTEL
Organisation
CJSC City Telecom
Country
—
RIR
RIPE
Registered
Source:asn:rdap retrieved

IPv4 prefixes

3

IPv6 prefixes

0

Total announced

3

Announced prefixes

Observed in BGP by route collectors, not a registry allocation list

Prefixes announced by AS28891
89.207.88.0/21 IPv4 /21 not checked
185.196.236.0/22 IPv4 /22 not checked
62.76.13.0/24 IPv4 /24 not checked

No rows match “”.

Showing – of

Source:ripestat:announced-prefixes observed

Internet Exchanges

Exchanges where this network has a listed peering LAN connection

Internet Exchange memberships listed for AS28891
Address families
Eurasia Peering IX: Peering LAN 20,000 Mbps IPv4
MSK-IX Moscow: MSK-IX peering network 5,000 Mbps IPv4

No rows match “”.

Showing – of

Source:peeringdb retrieved

Exchange membership means the network has a listed connection; it does not prove peering with other members.

Observed adjacencies

Networks seen next to AS28891 in BGP paths by route collectors.

Source:ripestat:asn-neighbours observed

Observed upstreams

11 networks seen before AS28891 in AS paths

No rows match “”.

Showing – of

Observed downstreams

2 networks seen after AS28891 in AS paths

Observed downstreams
Families
AS47808 FREIGHT-LINK-AS 129 155
v4
AS197273 OGK4-AS 38 53
v4

No rows match “”.

Showing – of

Uncertain adjacencies

8 adjacencies that may be an artefact of collector peering

Uncertain adjacencies
Families
AS24482 SGGS-AS-AP 1 27
v4
AS25091 IP-Max 1 9
v4
AS36236 NETACTUATE 3 5
v4
AS41722 MIRAN-AS 3 5
v4
AS28910 INTAL-ASN 2 4
v4
AS35598 INETCOM 2 4
v4
AS37721 ORG-VTS1-AFRINIC 2 4
v4
AS49673 TRUENETWORK 2 4
v4

No rows match “”.

Showing – of

Note:
These are observed adjacencies derived from BGP path data, not confirmed commercial relationships. A network appearing before another in an AS path does not establish that it is a paying transit customer, a settlement free peer, or anything else contractual. Adjacencies marked uncertain were seen only as direct peers of a route collector, so the collector's own peering may have created them.