asn.dev

Observed topology

AS262411 Force Telecom Ltda

Upstreams 7 carry this network
Downstreams 0 this network carries
Adjacent (IPv4) 7
Adjacent (IPv6) 5

Transit

Upstream networks

inferred

Networks observed carrying traffic for AS262411: the AS immediately before it in a routing path. Ranked by how many paths showed the relationship, which reflects how widely it is used, not how much traffic crosses it.

ASNetworkTypeFamiliesPaths seen
AS6939Hurricane Electric LLCTransitIPv4 IPv6300
AS61900Mais Internet LTDA EPPResidentialIPv4 IPv6102
AS267613ELETRONET S.A.UnclassifiedIPv4 IPv642
AS24482SG.GSHostingIPv4 IPv617
AS35280F5 Networks SARLHostingIPv4 IPv610
AS37721Virtual Technologies & SolutionsResidentialIPv44
AS57463NetIX Communications JSCUnclassifiedIPv44

Inferred from path position, not from any declaration by either party. A network appearing here is carrying these routes; whether that is a paid transit arrangement, a backup, or something else is not something routing data can tell you.

Transit

Downstream networks

inferred

Networks for which AS262411 was observed as the last hop before the origin, meaning it appears to provide them transit.

No downstream observed. This network does not appear to carry transit for anyone.

Adjacency

Adjacent networks

12 shown

Every AS seen directly next to AS262411 in a routing path, in either direction.

ASNetworkTypeFamiliesPaths seen
AS6939Hurricane Electric LLCTransitIPv4 IPv6300
AS61900Mais Internet LTDA EPPResidentialIPv4 IPv6102
AS267613ELETRONET S.A.UnclassifiedIPv4 IPv642
AS24482SG.GSHostingIPv4 IPv617
AS35280F5 Networks SARLHostingIPv4 IPv610
AS57463NetIX Communications JSCUnclassifiedIPv44
AS37721Virtual Technologies & SolutionsResidentialIPv44

Adjacency is not the same as peering. Being next to each other in a path covers paid transit, settlement-free peering and customer connections alike, and routing data cannot distinguish them. Treat this as "these networks exchange routes", nothing more specific.

Interconnection

Exchange presence

recorded

Internet exchanges where Packet Clearing House has a port recorded for AS262411, largest fabric first. An exchange is shared switching where networks interconnect directly rather than paying a transit provider to carry traffic between them, so turning up at one is a deliberate choice about how this network wants to be reached. Each name opens that exchange's own page, with its peering LANs and every other network recorded on it. Recorded at 7 exchanges across 1 country and 1 region.

ExchangeLocationTheir addressMember ports
IX.br (PTT.br) São PauloSão Paulo, Brazil187.16.211.1592,690
IX.br (PTT.br) FortalezaFortaleza, Brazil45.68.76.112920
IX.br (PTT.br) BrasíliaBrasília, Brazil45.184.144.158279
IX.br (PTT.br) CuritibaCuritiba, Brazil45.184.146.180244
IX.br (PTT.br) FlorianópolisFlorianópolis, Brazil200.219.141.158149
IX.br (PTT.br) Belo HorizonteBelo Horizonte, Brazil200.219.139.140120
IX.br (PTT.br) Foz do IguaçuFoz do Iguaçu, Brazil187.16.204.2233

Unlike the tables above, this is recorded rather than inferred. An address on a peering LAN is at that exchange by definition. Two carve-outs all the same. Member ports counts every participant at the exchange, not this network's ports, so read it as a size proxy. And an absent exchange means PCH has no record of it, not that the network is not there.

Provenance

Where this comes from

Derived from routing tables collected at 2026-08-08 10:00 UTC by route-views2,rrc00, as seen from 75 BGP vantage points across 74.02M route entries. These are observations from those vantage points, not a complete or authoritative view of the internet.

Cross-check against RIPEstat or BGP.tools, which observe from a different and larger set of vantage points.

Exchange presence comes from a separate dataset: the directory collected 2026-08-08 by Packet Clearing House (https://www.pch.net/ixp/data), covering 1,327 exchanges and 93,137 recorded member ports, licensed CC BY-NC-SA 3.0.

PeeringDB is the better-known directory and is deliberately not the source here: its acceptable-use policy forbids the bulk storage this needs. The two answer different questions anyway. PeeringDB reports what an operator declares about itself; this reports what PCH has recorded.