asn.dev

Observed topology

AS264539 Erik Lucas Barbosa

Unclassified LACNIC

Upstreams 2 carry this network
Downstreams 1 this network carries
Adjacent (IPv4) 3
Adjacent (IPv6) 3
Upstream graph Who carries AS264539, and who carries them, drawn as a map up to the transit-free core. 1 exchange Where AS264539 physically turns up to peer, and its address on each fabric.

Transit

Upstream networks

inferred

Networks observed carrying traffic for AS264539: 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
AS264595FALCAO NET PROVEDOR DE INTERNET LTDAResidentialIPv4 IPv6128
AS14840BR.Digital TelecomUnclassifiedIPv4 IPv689

Transit

Downstream networks

inferred

Networks for which AS264539 was observed as the last hop before the origin, meaning it appears to provide them transit.

ASNetworkTypeFamiliesPaths seen
AS263515Franca e Franca Com e Serv Ltda. MEUnclassifiedIPv4 IPv6214

Adjacency

Adjacent networks

observed

Every AS seen directly next to AS264539 in a routing path, in either direction.

ASNetworkTypeFamiliesPaths seen
AS14840BR.Digital TelecomUnclassifiedIPv4 IPv6273
AS263515Franca e Franca Com e Serv Ltda. MEUnclassifiedIPv4 IPv6214
AS264595FALCAO NET PROVEDOR DE INTERNET LTDAResidentialIPv4 IPv6158

Provenance

Where this comes from

Derived from routing tables collected at 2026-11-01 10:00 UTC by route-views2,rrc00, as seen from 76 BGP vantage points across 74.48M route entries. These are observations from those vantage points, not a complete or authoritative view of the internet.

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. 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.

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