Auto-optimal server selection operational?

[yepper 4]

A while back I remember reading here that it was in the works to implement selection of the best or least-used server when we connected. Is such auto-optimal server selection in force now? The reason I ask is because today I connected to Propus twice in a row, and it was very, very busy, and my performance was poor, but there were 17 other Netherlands servers nowhere near as busy. This is the first time I've ever had bad performance from AirVPN, and I would think that it could have been avoided had I landed on one of the other lightly-used servers.

[OpenSourcerer 1359]

Is such auto-optimal server selection in force now?

 

Excerpt from forum topic Three simultaneous connections per account allowed:

 

sg.vpn.airdns.org resolves into the "best" Singapore server entry-IP address [...]. The "best" server is the server with the highest rating computed every 5 minutes by keeping into account server status, latency, available bandwidth and packet loss. If the best server does not change then sg.vpn.airdns.org may resolve to the same IP address [...].

[mage1982 15]

The reason I ask is because today I connected to Propus twice in a row, and it was very, very busy, and my performance was poor, but there were 17 other Netherlands servers nowhere near as busy.

 

You're supposed to get the best server when using the "wildcard" hostnames, yes.

 

I had the exact same thing happen the last couple of days, for what it's worth. Thought all servers must have been bogged down and Propus was the least loaded. I see now that it is, in fact, the most. Good to know I wasn't hallucinating the poor bandwidth...

 

 

giganerd: Perhaps you should read the whole post before replying.

[yepper 4]

I don't comprehend either of the answers in the above two posts. Was my original post not clearly-worded? When I downloaded my config from the AirVPN Configuration Generator, I chose the "by countries" one, not "by single servers." I don't know what "wildcard hostnames" is all about, so my question is, does my by-countries config choose a randomly- or arbitrarily-selected Netherlands server, or has the optimally-selected server protocol alluded to earlier this year that picks the least-used server gone operational yet? In any case, something's not right, because I keep landing on the Propus server, and every time I check the AirVPN Status page, Propus is always overwhelmingly populated (circa 200 users), while all the 17 other Netherlands servers are sparsely connected (typically averaging perhaps only 50 users), so it looks like I'm not the only one facing this problem. I would think that this would be an easy question to answer by Management, so could the operator please reply? (I'm not complaining; I just need to know where we stand now — I'm perfectly happy to change to a single-server config to get off Propus if the proposed optimal-server method isn't implemented yet.)

[Staff 9755]

I don't comprehend either of the answers in the above two posts. Was my original post not clearly-worded? When I downloaded my config from the AirVPN Configuration Generator, I chose the "by countries" one, not "by single servers." I don't know what "wildcard hostnames" is all about, so my question is, does my by-countries config choose a randomly- or arbitrarily-selected Netherlands server, or has the optimally-selected server protocol alluded to earlier this year that picks the least-used server gone operational yet? In any case, something's not right, because I keep landing on the Propus server, and every time I check the AirVPN Status page, Propus is always overwhelmingly populated (circa 200 users), while all the 17 other Netherlands servers are sparsely connected

 

Hello!

 

You understood everything correctly, AND the DNS record update was broken, thus "nl.vpn.airdns.org" always resolved to Propus entry-IP address, regardless of the "best" server rating calculated by the system, causing an overwhelming congestion to Propus yesterday. The issue has been fixed several hours ago and situation is quickly reverting back to normality. Note that this system has been implemented more than one year ago and this is the first serious malfunction.

 

Kind regards

[yepper 4]

Thank you, Staff, for the concise & helpful reply, and your swift repair of the problem! I have tested connecting a few times, and I confirm that (what I have been calling) auto-optimal server selection is working again. Very happy!

[OpenSourcerer 1359]

Thank you, Staff, for the concise & helpful reply, and your swift repair of the problem! I have tested connecting a few times, and I confirm that (what I have been calling) auto-optimal server selection is working again. Very happy!

 

Pardon us, please. We're not able to see if there's a technical problem.

But at least we tried to help.