asn.dev

Autonomous system

AS6789 CRELCOM-NET

Unclassified RIPE

IPv4 addresses 49.92K 54 prefixes
IPv6 prefixes 2 counted as prefixes, not addresses
Countries 1 mostly RU
Flagged prefixes 0 none

Summary

Crelcom LLC

Russia · AI-generated

isp residential transit legacy

CRELCOM-NETCrelcom LLC, a regional telecommunications operator serving

Crimea, based in Simferopol. Its RIPE registration and contacts are Russian.

What it's used for

  • Retail broadband, television and telephony for subscribers in Crimea, carried in the operator's own large blocks (85.91.192.0/19, 91.247.96.0/19, 109.200.128.0/19, 80.245.112.0/20).
  • It also acts as a regional backbone: a large share of the ~68 announced prefixes are smaller blocks registered to other local organisations, so the AS carries transit for neighbouring Crimean networks as well as its own customers.

Notable

  • The network is a mix of eyeball and wholesale — the big /19s look like subscriber pools, while the scattered /22s and /24s are downstream customer assignments. Treat any single-label classification of this AS with caution.
  • The domain crimea.com resolves inside this AS.

Interesting

  • Crimea's connectivity was rerouted onto Russian infrastructure after 2014, and Crelcom's registry footprint reflects that: its own contacts are Russian while the AS number and much of the address space predate the change.

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

Address space

Summary

Full explorer
CountryNamePrefixes
RURussian Federation56

Registry

Allocation record

via RIPE RDAP
Registry
RIPE
Handle
AS6789
Registry name
CRELCOM-NET
Registrant
AS6789-MNT
Abuse contact
abuse@crelcom.ru
Registered
1970-01-01
Last changed
2026-04-29
Status
active

Reputation

Classification and threat

Unclassified Not in the curated lists. Most of the ~80,000 allocated ASNs are not.

No IC3 indicators Nothing from the FBI IC3 feed.

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

Elsewhere

Cross-check