NettoCyber Indonesia: PeeringDB fix list

AS24207 · peeringdb.com/net/17510

PeeringDB

4 things to fix in NettoCyber Indonesia's PeeringDB record, from what its exchanges publish: 2 to add, 2 to correct. As of 2026-10-08 20:58 UTC.

Make the changes on NettoCyber Indonesia's PeeringDB page: sign in, choose Edit, and find the exchanges under Public Peering Exchange Points. Speeds go in as megabits per second.

Add these exchanges (2)

On the exchange's own member list, but not in NettoCyber Indonesia's PeeringDB record. Add one entry per connection with these values.

  1. Singapore DE-CIX ASEAN Singapore, Singapore · PeeringDB 3472From its IX-F export
    IPv4103.162.254.171
    IPv62001:df6:480::5e8f:0:1
    Speed10000 Mbps (10G)
    RS peerYes
  2. Indonesia DE-CIX Jakarta Jakarta, Indonesia · PeeringDB 4411From its IX-F export
    IPv449.213.56.34
    IPv62001:df5:7880::5e8f:0:1
    Speed10000 Mbps (10G)
    RS peerYes

Correct these entries (2)

Addresses or port speeds in PeeringDB that differ from the exchange's IX-F export. The changes below follow the export; if the export is the one that's wrong, tell the exchange instead.

  1. Indonesia AIX Tapos, Depok, Indonesia · PeeringDB 4449
    ProblemPeeringDB hasThe export has
    IPv6 address missing from PeeringDBnone2401:91e0:31::24:207:1
    • In the entry with IPv4 43.254.82.221: set IPv6 to 2401:91e0:31::24:207:1 (now empty).

    PeeringDB's IX-F import is on for this exchange and this network allows automatic updates, so PeeringDB should make this change by itself. If it hasn't, PeeringDB may have hit a conflict: check the IX-F suggestions on the network's PeeringDB page.

  2. Indonesia IIX-Jakarta Jakarta, Indonesia · PeeringDB 210
    ProblemPeeringDB hasThe export has
    IPv6 address missing from PeeringDBnone2001:7fa:2:5::17c
    • In the entry with IPv4 123.108.9.124: set IPv6 to 2001:7fa:2:5::17c (now empty).

    PeeringDB's IX-F import is on for this exchange and this network allows automatic updates, so PeeringDB should make this change by itself. If it hasn't, PeeringDB may have hit a conflict: check the IX-F suggestions on the network's PeeringDB page.

From ixreport.com/net/24207/: PeeringDB against each exchange's IX-F export and website members list. Exchanges whose lists couldn't be read on this update aren't included.