Summary

  • RIPE identifies Promservice Ltd. as an LIR in Cherepovets and links the company to an allocated IPv4 /22 and IPv6 /29.
  • In RIPEstat's 08:00 UTC view on 5 September 2026, neither exact aggregate was marked announced and neither response listed related prefixes.
  • That dated collector result does not prove global invisibility, inactivity or service failure; it defines questions about origin control, activation cost and operational ownership.
  • Commercial diligence should value registered resources separately from capacity that is routed, monitored, supported and contractually usable.

Number resources look deceptively simple on a register. A block has a range, a status and an organisation reference. Those fields establish an administrative record. They do not reveal who can originate a route today, which upstream will accept it, whether systems are configured, or whether a support team can restore service after a fault.

The RIPE NCC member directory lists Promservice Ltd. at Mayakovsky Street 15 in Cherepovets and lists Russia and the United States as areas serviced. It also publishes a contact using the 4x4host.ru domain. That domain is a useful lead, not proof that every service using the brand is operated by the legal entity.

The organisation object identifies ORG-PL190-RIPE as an LIR, records registration number 1033500345878 and links RU-PROMSERVICE-MNT. An IPv4 object associates 185.25.152.0–185.25.155.255, a /22, with that organisation under ALLOCATED PA status. The record carries a colocation remark and names ROSINMEDIA-MNT for route maintenance. An IPv6 object associates 2a04:32c0::/29 with the same organisation under ALLOCATED-BY-RIR status.

The records cover substantial address ranges. A /22 contains 1,024 IPv4 addresses; an IPv6 /29 represents a much larger addressing option. Scarcity can give a recorded IPv4 allocation economic value. But the value of a registry allocation is not identical to the value of a usable service. Activation can require routing policy, upstream agreements, RPKI authorisations, filtering, monitoring, abuse handling, customer systems and staff.

At 08:00 UTC on 5 September 2026, RIPEstat's IPv4 prefix overview marked the exact /22 as not announced and returned no related prefixes. Its IPv6 overview did the same for the exact /29. These are bounded collector observations. They are not a universal reachability test, a traffic measurement or proof that no more-specific route exists outside the response.

There are several plausible explanations: reserve capacity, deliberate non-use, migration, delegated operation, an announcement outside the sampled view, or inactivity. Public evidence does not select one. Nor does it show customers, utilisation, revenue, contractual commitments, facilities, staff or restoration performance.

The practical diligence task is therefore to separate four layers. First is registry association: which organisation record and maintainer fields attach to the resource. Second is routing authority: which ASN may originate it and who controls the authorisation. Third is operational readiness: configuration, upstream acceptance, monitoring, security and response. Fourth is commercial usability: whether a customer can contract for a defined service with clear support and exit rights.

A buyer should request the intended prefix set, origin ASN, current route objects and ROAs, upstream acceptance evidence, monitoring views, abuse-response owner, activation timetable and migration plan. If the resource is an option rather than a live service, price it as an option. If it is sold as production capacity, require proof that the operating chain is already funded and controllable.

Sources

RIPE member entry; RIPE organisation; IPv4 allocation; IPv6 allocation; RIPEstat IPv4 view; RIPEstat IPv6 view.