asn.dev

Observed topology

AS271968 CENTRIC MOBILITY CEMO, S.R.L

Residential APNIC

Upstreams 1 carry this network
Downstreams 2 this network carries
Adjacent (IPv4) 3
Adjacent (IPv6) 3
Upstream graph Who carries AS271968, and who carries them, drawn as a map up to the transit-free core. 1 exchange Where AS271968 physically turns up to peer, and its address on each fabric.

Transit

Upstream networks

inferred

Networks observed carrying traffic for AS271968: 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
AS269931WIRELESS MULTI SERVICE VARGAS CABRERA, S. R. LResidentialIPv4 IPv6913

Transit

Downstream networks

inferred

Networks for which AS271968 was observed as the last hop before the origin, meaning it appears to provide them transit.

ASNetworkTypeFamiliesPaths seen
AS271989WALCOM ES LA RED WMPP SRLUnclassifiedIPv4 IPv6407
AS274107INCONET TELECOM, SRLUnclassifiedIPv4 IPv62

Adjacency

Adjacent networks

observed

Every AS seen directly next to AS271968 in a routing path, in either direction.

ASNetworkTypeFamiliesPaths seen
AS269931WIRELESS MULTI SERVICE VARGAS CABRERA, S. R. LResidentialIPv4 IPv61,322
AS271989WALCOM ES LA RED WMPP SRLUnclassifiedIPv4 IPv6407
AS274107INCONET TELECOM, SRLUnclassifiedIPv4 IPv62

Provenance

Where this comes from

Derived from routing tables collected at 2026-10-29 10:00 UTC by route-views2,rrc00, as seen from 76 BGP vantage points across 74.36M 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.