asn.dev

Autonomous system

AS14492 DATAPIPE

Hosting ARIN

IPv4 addresses 111K 81 prefixes
IPv6 prefixes 1 counted as prefixes, not addresses
Countries 1 mostly US
Exchanges 3 recorded by PCH
Upstreams 4 3 downstream
Flagged prefixes 0 none

Summary

DataPipe

United States · AI-generated

hosting business infrastructure

The netname convention changed halfway through the numbering, and the numbering carried straight on regardless.

What it's used for

  • A managed hosting network. 111,360 addresses across 81 IPv4 prefixes plus one IPv6 prefix, 2607:f9f0::/32, with 18 observed BGP neighbours.

Notable

  • Blocks one, three and four are named DATAPIPE-BLK1, DATAPIPE-BLK3 and DATAPIPE-BLK4.
  • Blocks five through eight are named DATAPIPE-NETBLK5, DATAPIPE-NETBLK6, DATAPIPE-NETBLK7 and DATAPIPE-NETBLK8.
  • Every block registers to DataPipe, Inc., several with a hostmaster contact alongside.
  • One of eighteen sampled addresses returned a name: 64.27.75.254 answers as shopattitudes.com.
  • Prefix sizes cluster tightly, mostly /20 and /21, spread across eight unrelated ranges.

Interesting

  • The word NETBLK appears from the fifth block onward and never before it. Whoever filed block five wrote the longer form and kept the sequence number, so the registry records both the change of habit and the exact point it happened.
  • The one address that answers gives a customer's own domain, with no provider label anywhere in the name. That is hosting working as intended: the address belongs to the provider, the name belongs to whoever rents it, and from outside only the second is visible.
  • Eighteen neighbours for 111,360 addresses is a network that buys transit from several providers at once. Hosting customers notice an outage immediately, and the cheapest insurance against one is another neighbour.

This description is AI-generated, best-effort context — not authoritative, and provided without any guarantee of accuracy. Source, and how to suggest an edit.

Interconnection

Peering at a glance

Full topology · Graph

Internet exchanges

Recorded at 3 exchanges in 1 country, largest first.

ExchangeLocationTheir address
New York International Internet ExchangeNew York, United States198.32.160.111
Equinix Internet Exchange San Jose (Bay Area)San Jose, United States206.223.116.13
Equinix Internet Exchange New YorkNew York, United States198.32.118.37

Transit providers

4 upstream, 3 downstream and 12 adjacent networks observed; most-used upstreams first.

ASNetworkPaths seen
AS12200Rackspace Hosting1,056
AS6939Hurricane Electric LLC211
AS9002RETN Limited115
AS24482SG.GS26

Exchange presence is recorded rather than inferred: the directory collected by Packet Clearing House (https://www.pch.net/ixp/data) on 2026-10-11, licensed CC BY-NC-SA 3.0. Transit is inferred from observed BGP paths, never declared by either party.

Address space

Summary

Shape and geography

IPv4 81 prefixes · 111K addresses IPv6 1 prefixes

CountryNamePrefixes
USUnited States of America82

Registry

Allocation record

ARIN · via Atlas (registry + RDAP)
Registry
ARIN
Handle
AS14492
Registry name
DATAPIPE
Registrant
DataPipe, Inc.
Abuse contact
abuse@rackspace.com
Registered
1999-12-22
Last changed
2012-03-02
Allocation
assigned

Routing security

RPKI and IRR

Full detail
RPKI
0% valid · 0 valid, 26 with no ROA
ROAs
0 authorising AS14492
ASPA
no ASPA record
IRR
100% registered · 26 of 26 announcements
Route objects
73 naming AS14492

Reputation

Classification and threat

Hosting Datacenter or cloud provider. Addresses are servers, not people.

Spamhaus DROP

Not on ASN-DROP The network as a whole is not listed.

No DROP prefixes None of its announced space is on the DROP prefix list.

Spamhaus DROP ("Don't Route Or Peer") lists space and networks run by, or hijacked for, spam and cybercrime operations: 432 networks and 1,768 prefixes, as published 2026-10-12. A short, high-confidence list, so a match is worth taking seriously, and absence from it says little on its own.

FBI IC3

No IC3 indicators Nothing from the FBI IC3 feed.

IC3 threat data is alpha. Absence of an indicator is not evidence of good behaviour, only of absence from this one feed.

Elsewhere

Cross-check