Not connected, Your IP: 216.73.216.21
Online: 35949 users - 459840 Mbit/s total BWAll Activity
This stream auto-updates
- Past hour
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
- Today
-
Hi, Probably already suggested in the past (couldn't find anything upon searching) but here we go: Will it be possible that Air provides a DNS only service? It can be beneficial to those who cannot/don't want to host their own instance of adguard/pihole. I am aware of services such as NextDNS, but I would definitely prefer and trust an AirVPN take on this. I was thinking about it since Air already supplies DNS blocklists if it can be an option in the future. Wouldn't mind if it consumed 1/5 from the available slots. Cheers
-
Is 192.168.254.254 your router's IP address? Is your computer's IP address set to 192.168.254.104? However, the log shows that your computer's IP is 192.168.254.254, which means that your computer's IP is indeed not being routed correctly. Does your router have an IP-MAC binding function in its DHCP settings? If so, it is recommended that you use DHCP to bind the devices you want to use to the local IP address via MAC identifier. If not, you can try assigning the router address to 192.168.254.1, and then assigning other devices to addresses after that (192.168.254.2~192.168.254.254). -
I use quite some hardware, so its better to asign static IPs, or otherwise connecting multiple NAS can gets troublesome ... When upgrading my old Mac with the new I just changed all IPs in my network from 192.168.0.xxx to now 192.168.254.xxx Router: 192.168.254.254 Subnet Mask: 255.255.255.0 en0 Mac: 192.168.254.104 (static) Subnet Mask: 255.255.255.0 All my computers and NAS work with that like before. The only difference is Eddie wich isnt showing transfer speed anymore. -
This is caused by an incorrect local network IP address. I see from the logs that your computer's local IP address is 192.168.254.254. I would like to ask what the IP address of your router's LAN port is? Home network IP addresses are usually automatically assigned by the router (DHCP). Why would you need to manually assign one? If you absolutely must use a static local IP address, please ensure that the IP is correctly routed. For example, if your router's LAN port IP is 192.168.3.1, then all devices connected to this router must have IP addresses within the corresponding address pool (192.168.3.2~192.168.3.254). Has your computer's IP been correctly routed? Please check carefully.
-
Any update guys?
-
Yes, if you need help from the community, try to provide logs or screenshots of program malfunctions. Text descriptions alone make it difficult to pinpoint the problem. However, there's another reason: I simply didn't see it. Haha, there are plenty of posts on the community forum after all. 😄😄😄
-
Have you added a specific server to the allowed list in the server list? You can check the "Show All" box at the bottom of the Eddie server interface to see all servers.
- Yesterday
-
One probable reason no one answers you is because you gave too little information, and people don't bother spending time to ask you for it. Close Eddie and reopen, try a connection, then provide a system report: .
-
-
-
-
Can I get a little help? Why is Komephoros in Canada the only server? Is this normal??
-
Really? It's good news to know that it's not a server issue.😂 It seems the only option left is to try AmneziaWG 1.5. 😡Damn the GFW! The latest GFW has incorporated AI, greatly enhancing its ability to block VPN protocols. Fortunately, China is vigorously promoting IPv6, which allows me to catch my breath for now. The future depends on full support from the AmneziaWG protocol.🙌
-
OK - the default configuration does not work, but modified one works. Looks like DPI is not always on in Uzbekistan, but as of 12/11/2025 3:10pm its on. AmneziaVPN with the following params in [Interface] section works Jc = 20 Jmin = 50 Jmax = 1000 S1 = 0 S2 = 0 H1 = 3 H2 = 1 H3 = 4 H4 = 2 and it does not work without them. I guess AirVPN team needs to make it available for EddieUI. And grant me a few month of free access for the testing Alex
-
Hello! Understood. This is typical with dynamic blocking by GFW and other blocking tools. Remember that GFW (and other blocking tools) behavior is not deterministic, as clearly disclosed and proved at the USENIX Security Symposium 2025. We have already put in place methods capable to defeat the GFW in most circumstances (probably 85% success rate), as you have noticed, and when you are blocked by some heuristic decision of the GFW you necessarily need some trial and error. We are working to increase the success rate even more, stay tuned in the near future. No, this is not the case. OpenVPN eats resources but not in a critical way, and it will require less and less resources while more and more clients switch to WireGuard or AmneziaWG. According to your description, to the lack of any warning by our monitoring system, and the fact the we have no similar complaints from Western countries, we feel comfortable to say that this is not a server side problem. Kind regards
-
This is a problem. Because it's dynamic. For example, today I can connect to all ports on server A, but only to a specific port on server B. Tomorrow, I might only be able to connect to the specific port on server A, while all ports on server B will be available. All servers behave this way; there's no guarantee that one will always be available and another will always be unavailable. Server hardware and software are fixed, and my network environment is also fixed. Only the server load is dynamic, which is why I suspect it's a problem of Wireguard resources being exhausted on the server. Perhaps OpenVPN is consuming too many resources. I think we can verify this on the two servers testing DCO by increasing the priority of WireGuard and seeing if all WireGuard ports are available.
-
Hello! It could. Feel free to try it. Let us double check in order to ascertain that the problem is not on the server side: can you please send us the names of the servers you experience this problem on? Kind regards
-
I'm also confused. Perhaps the hardware isn't powerful enough? A 1Gbps server can handle 100+ users with 80% bandwidth utilization. This means a 10Gbps server would need 1000+ users to achieve the same 80% bandwidth utilization. However, in reality, a 10Gbps server experiences a significant speed drop when handling 300+ users, seemingly unable to keep up. It would be better to label it as a 3Gbps or 5Gbps server, as the actual speed difference from the advertised 10Gbps is substantial. If that's the case, it would be better to replace one 10Gbps server with ten 1Gbps servers. Maybe that's the case? I think AirVPN may have leased a 10Gbps network in the data center, but the servers can't handle that 10Gbps network. Isn't that a waste of resources? I think AirVPN can increase the number of 1Gbps servers as much as possible to make full use of network bandwidth, which would also save on server costs for AirVPN, wouldn't it?
-
-
Really? So how can this be resolved? Change the connection protocol? But it's still the same when I use AmneziaWG 1.0. Can QUIC simulation in AmneziaWG 1.5 solve this problem? My ISP did not block the corresponding UDP ports. Some servers have all ports unavailable via Wireguard, some can only use one specific port, and some can connect to all three ports. What a perplexing question! Wireguard is not as available on all servers as OpenVPN, which causes some trouble for users who use Wireguard to connect. Did WireGuard require strict network conditions from the outset? I always feel that WireGuard's compatibility is not as good as OpenVPN's. Is it that network compatibility is sacrificed for high performance? In any case, allocating more resources to Wireguard is reasonable, as Wireguard's high performance will be appreciated by more people. Of course, OpenVPN is also indispensable, as there will always be some people who need to bypass strict network restrictions. Is DCO an effective solution for optimizing both? I'm really looking forward to it. So, what stage is DCO testing at? Is DCO 2.6.14 still unstable? OpenVPN 2.7 series has already removed support for WinTun, so I believe the OpenVPN team is full of confidence in DCO for the 2.7 series. I'm really looking forward to seeing the DCO effect in the official 2.7 series.
- Last week
-
-
Are you sure you don't have an option somewhere in the gateway settings to prevent opnsense making static routes for monitor IP? I have that in pfsense. I usually trace the route through the VPN interface to anything (e.g. 9.9.9.9) and then use the first or second hop as the monitor address for that gateway. In past experience I've had times where gateway monitoring said everything was fine but reaching the internet wasn't happening. That's why I've taken to pinging something on the other side of the VPN gateway.
-
I've seen this happen on Vindemiatrix, and I think it happened on Taiyangshou today as well (maximum is 4.8 Gb/s but that is average so likely it did surpass 5 Gb/s). I still wonder why overall bandwidth utilization of 10 Gbps servers are low (<50%), is this just due to scaling?
-
Hello! This is a problem caused by blocks though, not a server problem. Kind regards
-
-
Hello! With WireGuard it's a very good choice as the DNS server IP address (10.128.0.1) is also the VPN gateway address, on every and each server since the WireGuard network is one. With OpenVPN, you have different subnet on every server though and you can't rely on a fixed address. 10.4.0.1 is available on every server for DNS queries but does not respond to ping. You could consider to extract the gateway from the tun interface settings at each connection and ping that gateway. Kind regards
-
What’s your take on TikTok and privacy concerns?
Kartik Sharma replied to danielmartinhq's topic in Off-Topic
That’s a really solid breakdown, and it honestly explains why people get tripped up with TikTok mods and similar apps. Back in the XDA and GitHub days, trust came from the community, not from some shiny website repeating “safe” fifteen times. What you said about real modders avoiding those polished download pages is spot on. I was chatting with someone at SEO Discovery about this kind of thing recently, and they mentioned how those overly SEO-optimized sites tend to target people who don’t know the difference between a genuine project and a sketchy clone. Your experience pretty much lines up with that. -
Hello! Nothing wrong, it's possible that the third party service is malfunctioning. Are you able to reach your listening service from the Internet? Kind regards
-
.thumb.png.8be84fd39f94c1640ac8c5456fbf3449.png)
Expose Jellyfin to internet through AirVPN port forwarding
Staff replied to charoki60's topic in Troubleshooting and Problems
Hello! This is potentially the problem, We can't be sure because for some unfathomable reason you deleted once again the endpoint address and the port. Or did you literally enter "#ip" and "#port"? By the way, when VPN_SERVICE_PROVIDER environment variable is set to an integrated VPN such as AirVPN (as it is in your case) you can rely on more proper variables that will prevent you from entering wrong addresses and/or ports. Please set the proper environment variables, delete the quoted ones (quoted here above), and check whether the problem gets resolved. Please see here again: https://github.com/qdm12/gluetun-wiki/blob/main/setup/providers/airvpn.md Kind regards -
-
-
-
-
I'll look into it, thank you -
For the sake of so-called security, Windows' system permission design can sometimes be quite annoying. When I installed Windows, I configured Huorong Security Software with the highest privileges, locking the core Windows processes from being tampered with. For any operations requiring high privileges, I use Huorong Security Software's toolbox, which can solve the problem with a single click, saving me a lot of trouble.
