Summary

  • LACNIC's 2 November transfer export records six separate /16s leaving TELEFONICA MOVIL DE CHILE S.A. between 11 June and 4 September 2026. Three went to the RIPE NCC region, two to ARIN and one to APNIC: 393,216 IPv4 addresses in all.
  • RIPE NCC, ARIN and APNIC publish matching receiving records for the exact ranges. They do not publish the six as one departing portfolio. The three receiving registries each see only their own part of the exit.

The first /16 left on 11 June. By 4 September, five named recipients in three other registry regions held six complete blocks from the same source. There is no need to invent a secret master transaction to find the story. The extraordinary thing is visible in the ordinary paperwork: one holder's address portfolio was divided across three different rulebooks, and the full outline appears only when a reader assembles four RIR records.

LACNIC's cumulative transfer file is the starting ledger. It names TELEFONICA MOVIL DE CHILE S.A. as source in six 2026 entries. Each entry contains a disjoint /16, exactly 65,536 IPv4 addresses. Together they contain 393,216 addresses, or 1,536 /24 units. These are six recorded transfers, not one address range cut into six rows for display.

The first three destinations were in the RIPE NCC service region. On 11 June, 181.201.0.0/16 went to European ION Investment Group SL; on 16 June, 152.175.0.0/16 went to SAKURA INTERNATIONAL INVESTMENT LIMITED; on 24 June, 181.202.0.0/16 went to NXA Global Online Services Ltd. The RIPE NCC incoming-transfer list independently lists those three exact prefixes and dates. Its rendering of the first recipient is European IO-N Investment Group SL. Matching the range and date does more work than silently forcing two spellings into one string.

On 16 July the trail moved to ARIN. LACNIC and ARIN's own cumulative export record 181.200.0.0/16 and 181.203.0.0/16 going to Videotron Ltee on the same day. Two blocks, one recipient, 131,072 addresses. They are not adjacent /16s: 181.201.0.0/16 and 181.202.0.0/16 had already gone to separate RIPE-side recipients. Read the four addresses in order and the fragmentation becomes physical on the page, even though the register says nothing about where packets went.

The sixth block, 191.124.0.0/16, went to FASTMOS CO., LIMITED. LACNIC dates it 4 September; APNIC's archived transfer list lists the same prefix, source and recipient with a 3 September date. The one-day difference is in the public records. Neither file explains it. APNIC RDAP currently holds an exact-range FASTMOS object, confirming the receiving registry's present record, not the timing of a network cutover.

This is what cross-registry transfer actually asks of a reader. The originating RIR can show a single source's exits; each receiving RIR can show its own entries. No receiving archive can by itself show that the Chilean source sent three /16s into RIPE NCC, two into ARIN and one into APNIC. RIPE NCC's inter-RIR procedure says both registries must approve a transfer and update their records. That bilateral procedure is sensible for each move. Six bilateral records still require a seventh act: someone must join them if they want the whole portfolio history.

The joins have rough edges. For these same six rows, LACNIC's recipient-country fields do not match the receiving registries' country fields; the RIPE trio, the ARIN pair and the APNIC row all differ. Country codes are a poor substitute for a stable resource trail. An earlier BTW examination of Vodafone ONO transfers already exposed this field problem; here the point is that it follows a source across three receiving RIRs, while exact address ranges remain joinable. Current RIPE RDAP for 152.175.0.0/16 also names Sakura Communications Limited, while the transfer lists name SAKURA INTERNATIONAL INVESTMENT LIMITED. The public record does not supply their relationship or a later-change chain. A current holder label must not be quietly passed off as the original recipient.

The missing document is a public, versioned cross-RIR receipt tying each prefix to its source, recipient, approval date, receiving registry and any subsequent holder change. A price or a claimed commercial motive would answer a different question. These files establish registry transfers; they do not establish a sale, deployment or service migration. The practical stake is custody of identity. When a network number crosses a regional boundary, operators, counterparties and auditors need to know which registry and which holder can now authorize changes.

Six clean /16s can leave one book and land in three others without any of those destination books displaying the exit as a whole.