Brazil ASN and IP Address Allocation: What the Country-Level Data Shows

Brazil ranks second in the IPIP.NET country-level table for both allocated ASNs (9,157) and announced ASNs (8,783), behind only the United States. The same row shows 77,606,656 IPv4 addresses and 31,373,490,721,038 IPv6 /64 blocks. If you are reading that row to judge how large, how concentrated, or how IPv6-ready Brazil's internet is, the four numbers answer different questions and should not be mixed.

What the Brazil row actually contains

The IPIP.NET table "Autonomous Systems and IP Address Allocations by Country / Region" lists, for each country or region:

• Allocated ASNs — autonomous system numbers assigned to that country/region in the registry records.
• Announced ASNs — ASNs actually visible in BGP announcements.
• ASN IPv4 Number — the count of IPv4 addresses associated with those ASNs.
• ASN IPv6 Number (/64) — the count of IPv6 address space expressed in /64 units.

For Brazil the values are:

Allocated vs. announced ASNs: what the gap means

Brazil's gap is 374 ASNs (9,157 − 8,783), or about 4.1% of allocated numbers. That is small. It means the overwhelming majority of ASNs assigned to Brazil are actually in use and visible in routing — not dormant allocations sitting in a registry.

For comparison, using the same table:

A large gap usually points to one of a few things: historical allocations that were never deployed, numbers held by organizations that stopped announcing, or registry assignments that never reached the routing table. Brazil's low gap suggests its ASN space is comparatively "live." India's high gap suggests a large share of allocated ASNs are not currently announced.

This is a routing-activity signal, not a measure of network quality or market maturity.

IPv4 addresses relative to ASN count

Brazil has 77,606,656 IPv4 addresses spread across roughly 8,783 announced ASNs — about 8,836 IPv4 addresses per announced ASN on average. That average is a rough density indicator, not a per-network figure; a handful of large carriers hold most of the space.

Two cautions when reading this number:

• The table reports addresses associated with ASNs attributed to Brazil, which is not the same as addresses geographically located in Brazil. A Brazilian-registered ASN can announce address space used elsewhere, and foreign ASNs can announce space used inside Brazil.
• IPv4 exhaustion means the number reflects historical allocation, not current demand. A country's IPv4 count says more about when it received space than about how much it needs now.

Why the IPv6 number looks enormous

The IPv6 figure — 31,373,490,721,038 — is counted in /64 blocks, not addresses. A single /64 contains 2^64 addresses, so the unit is deliberately coarse. The number is large because IPv6 space is allocated in vastly bigger chunks than IPv4.

Do not compare the IPv4 count (77,606,656) directly against the IPv6 count (31,373,490,721,038) and conclude Brazil has hundreds of thousands of times more IPv6 than IPv4. The units differ. The IPv6 column tells you how much /64-sized space is associated with Brazilian ASNs; the IPv4 column tells you how many individual IPv4 addresses. They are not the same kind of quantity.

What the IPv6 column is useful for is relative comparison between countries in the same table, since every row uses the same /64 unit.

Comparing Brazil with the United States and China

Using the same four columns:

Reading across:

• The United States leads on every column, with roughly 3.5× Brazil's allocated ASNs and about 19× its IPv4 addresses.
• Brazil has more allocated and announced ASNs than China, but far fewer IPv4 addresses (77.6M vs. 356.4M) and far less IPv6 /64 space.
• China has fewer ASNs but much larger address blocks per ASN, consistent with a more concentrated carrier structure.

So ASN count and address count measure different things: ASN count reflects how many distinct routing entities exist, while address count reflects how much space is held. A country can rank high on one and lower on the other, and Brazil is an example of that.

Common misreadings to avoid

• Treating ASN count as network size. Many small ASNs can outnumber a few large ones while holding less address space.
• Treating the IPv4 count as population-adjusted. The table gives absolute counts only; without population data you cannot derive per-capita figures from it.
• Comparing IPv4 and IPv6 columns directly. Different units, as explained above.
• Assuming country attribution equals geography. ASN-to-country mapping is registry-based and does not guarantee where traffic or infrastructure physically sits.
• Reading the gap as a quality score. A small allocated-to-announced gap shows routing activity, not performance, coverage, or reliability.

How to use the Brazil row in practice

If you need a quick, defensible statement about Brazil's internet from this table, the safe ones are:

• Brazil has the second-highest allocated and announced ASN counts in the table, after the United States.
• Its allocated-to-announced gap is small relative to peers like the United States and India, indicating most allocated ASNs are announced.
• Its IPv4 holdings are far smaller than China's despite having more ASNs, and its IPv6 /64 space is likewise smaller than China's.

Anything beyond that — market concentration, per-capita availability, IPv6 adoption rate — requires additional data the table does not provide.