Autonomous system
AS204035 ONECORP
Hosting RIPE
Interconnection
Peering at a glance
Internet exchanges
Recorded at 6 exchanges in 1 country, largest first.
| Exchange | Location | Their address |
|---|---|---|
| DE-CIX Frankfurt | Frankfurt, Germany | 80.81.192.234 |
| KleyReX Internet Exchange | Frankfurt, Germany | 193.189.82.126 |
| DE-CIX Dusseldorf | Düsseldorf, Germany | 185.1.170.125 |
| Local Internet Exchange Düsseldorf | Düsseldorf, Germany | 185.1.155.6 |
| DE-CIX Munich | Munich, Germany | 185.1.208.135 |
| DE-CIX Hamburg | Hamburg, Germany | 185.1.210.136 |
Exchange presence is recorded rather than inferred: the directory collected by Packet Clearing House (https://www.pch.net/ixp/data) on 2026-10-13, licensed CC BY-NC-SA 3.0. Transit is inferred from observed BGP paths, never declared by either party.
Address space
Summary
IPv4 15 prefixes · 8.19K addresses IPv6 2 prefixes
| Country | Name | Prefixes |
|---|---|---|
| DE | Germany | 17 |
Registry
Allocation record
- Registry
- RIPE
- Handle
AS204035- Registry name
- onecorp
- Registrant
- de-onecorp-1-mnt
- Abuse contact
- abuse@onecorp.eu
- Registered
- 2015-09-09
- Last changed
- 2026-09-28
- Allocation
- allocated
Routing security
RPKI and IRR
- RPKI
- 100% valid · 30 valid, 0 with no ROA
- ROAs
- 34 authorising AS204035
- ASPA
- no ASPA record
- IRR
- 100% registered · 30 of 30 announcements
- Route objects
- 31 naming AS204035
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: 442 networks and 1,773 prefixes, as published 2026-10-13. 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