Air doesn't seem to use Datacamp (AS60068) servers

[wesdcsafd 0]

I've personally tested some relatively niche areas such as Tokyo, Singapore, Vienna and so on. Most of these areas use M247's servers, and Singapore also uses LeaseWeb's.
Air's competitors are not only M247, but also use a lot of Datacamp servers, such as Mullvad, which also has a good reputation.

So my question is why Air doesn't or rarely use Datacamp servers? Is it for cost reasons or is it a security issue with Datacamp data centres? Whilst I think M247 is pretty good, I don't think it's a good idea to be heavily reliant on the M247 network.
 

[cccthats3cs 14]

Thank you for asking this as I am also curious. In general I see network/provider diversity as a good thing, and would prefer to see any added servers be on new locations/networks when possible. The new 3 Gbit guaranteed servers which if memory serves are all on Tzulo are a step in that direction that I appreciate.

[foDkc4UySz 9]

On 2/13/2024 at 6:27 AM, wesdcsafd said:

So my question is why Air doesn't or rarely use Datacamp servers?

@Staff at AirVPN genrally establish b2b contracts with network providers based on strict philosophical confines of legislative data-security within that host-nation, and then later, determine server/contract longevity based on datacentre network-reliability.

This is what I've learned about their decision making for 7 years or so. It's just my perception and opinion.

It's not necessarily that they do as they please (ie, withdrawing all four servers from Lithuania, and acting like two new servers in Latvia(/Estonia (??)) was a sufficient replacement, with no comment on their reach-out efforts to other .lt DCs/Hosts... #StillSalty), but they do what they think is best (ie, withdrawing the very brief Australia server, because of then newly introduced data-retention laws).

Some parts of the world are simply difficult to serve within the confines of AirVPNs goals. AirVPN doesn't operate on location-diversity (a la NordVPN et al), only on information-security: they've already pidgeonholed themselves, against a global-customer base that doesn't know their own home-laws well enough, ie, try educating to an Aussie that connecting to an Aussie server is just like flipping the condom.

Staff face increasing operational issues:

• active users/customers in this forum, including myself, have pushed for network-diversity within singular host-nations; USA probably biggest beneficiary of this,
• we've pushed for 10gBit/s at least three years before Staff introduced the first 10gBit servers,
• they've seen mass migration of Mullvad's customer base since Mullvad stopped portforwarding, because AirVPN offered a network technology their competitors don't or withdrew from offering.
• we're pushing them to expand bandwidth in established host-nations (ie New Zealand) which became heavily congested as a result of the above,
• and now there's the Italian-Customer snooping bill, which directly affect them as they're an Italian registered business. Sod's law!

I sympathise with them. The customer base is not their enemy. It's just their average global customer isn't what their product/service is meant to appeal to: AirVPN has one server in South America, zero servers in Continental Africa, Middle East and Central Asia.

That's no good for an Argentinian in Australia or a Nigerian in the UK wanting to access home-TV, which itself becomes a fools-errand, once the IP is determined to be of VPN/Commercial use and blocked by the prospective (legal!) IPTV service.

We had to force them into realising 10gBit is the future, that locations like .sg and .nz need expansion, and now I'm pushing for a default protocol change to WireGuard. We the tail are trying to wag the dog. We have to. Otherwise the dog leads itself.

Staff will do what they deem best. For them, it's not a location, host, or subscriber game. They have bigger fish to fry. Just keep voicing and evidencing until your argument becomes the biggest fish. There are other active customers here, probably wanting the same thing. Just they're not regularly forum-active, simply happy with AirVPNs service-offering, and perhaps afraid to voice demand.

So stay active, review the service. If you can't make AirVPN work for you by end of contract-term, then, it's not for you.

AirVPNs loss

 

[fsy 34]

17 hours ago, foDkc4UySz said:

withdrawing the very brief Australia server, because of then newly introduced data-retention laws

To set the facts straight, they withdrew server from Australia for the anti-encryption law. Data retention was not the reason. https://airvpn.org/forums/topic/49217-new-country-new-zealand-new-1-gbits-server-available/?do=findComment&comment=165895
 

17 hours ago, foDkc4UySz said:

withdrawing all four servers from Lithuania, and acting like two new servers in Latvia(/Estonia (??)) was a sufficient replacement,

They dismissed Lithuania servers for the provider was no more neutral, AirVPN wrote they wanted a forced block of all the outbound ports but a few ones and failed to offer IPv6. https://airvpn.org/forums/topic/45866-servers-withdrawal-announcement-lithuania/?tab=comments#comment-103504 - then they powered up servers in Latvia, Estonia, Ukraine and Sweden, the countries with direct connections with Lithuania. The entire region is terribly underutilized as far as I see on the status page, they probably expanded way too much.
 

17 hours ago, foDkc4UySz said:

stay active, review the service

Yes, I see that they are very careful about feedback, but feedback based on false information or fake news could end up being useless or counterproductive, so get your facts right to gain credibility.