11,000

[me.moo@posteo.me 80]

So good to see the 11,000 number of AirVPN users. It may have happened already, at some point but its just great to see

[foxmulder 43]

Yes, and the server loads did also increase. Especially on the NL servers. Maybe staff has to bulk up the server capabilities to keep up with the surging amount of users.

 

It must have gotten around that AIR is one of the best out there... 

[OpenSourcerer 1435]

Yes, and the server loads did also increase. Especially on the NL servers. Maybe staff has to bulk up the server capabilities to keep up with the surging amount of users.

 

There are no problems with reachability, latency or speed, so why should they?

[Kepler_452b 77]

 

Yes, and the server loads did also increase. Especially on the NL servers. Maybe staff has to bulk up the server capabilities to keep up with the surging amount of users.

 

There are no problems with reachability, latency or speed, so why should they?

 

Well put.

[LZ1 672]

Hello !

 

Cool. I once read a post on a VPN review site which suggested that while many may sign up for AirVPN, relatively few actually renew their subscription - for whatever reason. I don't know how true this is, but it's an interesting thought to me.

[urbanconcrete 14]

Hello !

 

Cool. I once read a post on a VPN review site which suggested that while many may sign up for AirVPN, relatively few actually renew their subscription - for whatever reason. I don't know how true this is, but it's an interesting thought to me.

 

I've never seen a review like that and wonder how they got the allegedly information.

[iwih2gk 93]

There are so many folks here that are onboard year after year.  Some of us keep our same website/account names, and some of us prefer to sign up using a new account every year to remain "under the radar".  I have observed steady growth and that does not happen with folks just checking out Air for a small period of time.  Think about it.

[NaDre 157]

I wonder if AirVPN will not have to rethink their allocation of forwarded ports, then.

The IP port range is 0 to 65536. And 0 to 2047 are restricted. So that is 63,489 ports available. If everyone takes their 20 maximum, the supply runs out at 3,174.45 users.

 

They may have to reduce the number each of us can have. Could we sell back the ones we have for discounts?

 

Or opt for a scheme where each port is only good for certain servers, which the user may select per port, to a maximum number per port. This would be a bit of a software development project. And it would make things more complicated for those who run services requiring forwarded ports.

[go558a83nk 362]

I wonder if AirVPN will not have to rethink their allocation of forwarded ports, then.

 

The IP port range is 0 to 65536. And 0 to 2047 are restricted. So that is 63,489 ports available. If everyone takes their 20 maximum, the supply runs out at 3,174.45 users.

 

They may have to reduce the number each of us can have. Could we sell back the ones we have for discounts?

 

Or opt for a scheme where each port is only good for certain servers, which the user may select per port, to a maximum number per port. This would be a bit of a software development project. And it would make things more complicated for those who run services requiring forwarded ports.

 

I'm thinking most people don't reserve any ports so I don't think it's near being a problem yet.

[OpenSourcerer 1435]

I wonder if AirVPN will not have to rethink their allocation of forwarded ports, then.

 

The IP port range is 0 to 65536. And 0 to 2047 are restricted. So that is 63,489 ports available. If everyone takes their 20 maximum, the supply runs out at 3,174.45 users.

 

They may have to reduce the number each of us can have. Could we sell back the ones we have for discounts?

 

Or opt for a scheme where each port is only good for certain servers, which the user may select per port, to a maximum number per port. This would be a bit of a software development project. And it would make things more complicated for those who run services requiring forwarded ports.

 

Most of them only use one or two. I for example forwarded one, you can add my 19 others to the pool.

[me.moo@posteo.me 80]

I have four but could quite easily just use two. To be safe I'll keep hold of the four

[highchilled 3]

Hello !

 

Cool. I once read a post on a VPN review site which suggested that while many may sign up for AirVPN, relatively few actually renew their subscription - for whatever reason. I don't know how true this is, but it's an interesting thought to me.

Maybe they renew, but make it anonymous - so nobody knows it are the same people? ;D

And I would also like to know who has this information, and where he got it from, bc nobody should have it but Air ;D

[itguy2017 25]

Signed up for 3 days. Tested the heck out of it.

 

Just signed up for a full year. As long as service quality doesn't degrade (speed, reliability, etc) then I will renew it every year. But I have bad experiences with service quality degradation with most VPN firms. I have my own OpenVPN server and access to a Fortinet VPN service behind a massive COLO, but choose this one for overall flexibility and reliability. Although my home one is probably just if not more secure I need something outside of the normal gateway here for security/privacy. I don't trust Fortinet VPN after the full compromise was revealed anyway...

[ɹoɹɹǝ 26]

I wonder if AirVPN will not have to rethink their allocation of forwarded ports, then.

 

The IP port range is 0 to 65536. And 0 to 2047 are restricted. So that is 63,489 ports available. If everyone takes their 20 maximum, the supply runs out at 3,174.45 users.

 

They may have to reduce the number each of us can have. Could we sell back the ones we have for discounts?

 

Or opt for a scheme where each port is only good for certain servers, which the user may select per port, to a maximum number per port. This would be a bit of a software development project. And it would make things more complicated for those who run services requiring forwarded ports.

 

I don't see all of the ports being used in the near future... Most people don't use port forwarding, but if they do, they probably only use ~3. In all honesty though, the more ports being used the more anonymous the servers become. The more traffic/services being ran from each server, would increase bandwidth usage and each server would be communicating with different IP's (those who connect to those services being ran from the server).

[go558a83nk 362]

and now I see we're over 12268 online as I write this.  Air is growing!

[LZ1 672]

and now I see we're over 12268 online as I write this.  Air is growing!

Who knew Theresa May & Donald Trump could be so good for business !

[go558a83nk 362]

wow, 12885 users online as I write this.

[LZ1 672]

wow, 12885 users online as I write this.

Sales work!

[go558a83nk 362]

Online Members: 12987 - BW: 43181 Mbit/s

 

even more now! 

[zhang888 1066]

43Gbit/s, only a few years ago that would be the capacity of a large national ISP in most countries

[go558a83nk 362]

Online Members: 13193 - BW: 44135 Mbit/s

 

it's blowing up!

[OpenSourcerer 1435]

43Gbit/s, only a few years ago that would be the capacity of a large national ISP in most countries

 

AirVPN as an ISP? Creepy idea..

[go558a83nk 362]

Online Members: 14007 - BW: 44861 Mbit/s

 

14000!!

[LZ1 672]

Something must be working!

[go558a83nk 362]

Something must be working!

 

keep that in mind.  even though a lot of posts in the forum are complaints over things not working there are a lot of users who are probably having no problems.