Leaderboard

Hello! Bug reproduced, it is an undersized variable's overflow. You will see the fix very soon, in the next 3.2.1. Thank you for your tests! Kind regards

Looking for the same in CHICAGO area always busy! around 70-90% nowadays!

Norway's servers are over 60% most of the day. Can you ship a couple of Sweden's unused servers to Oslo? There's like 5 not being used.

I am noticing the same performance issues. As a quick real-world test, I set up a torrent between a torrent client connected to 1 of the 4 servers and another torrent client connected to one of the other 4 servers. The speeds as indicated in the screenshot below (this is from the uploading client) barely got above 3 MB/s. In previous tests that I did following this same methodology using the M247 servers when they were active, I was able to see speeds of usually 8-10 MB/s. I also downloaded an Ubuntu ISO via BitTorrent on one of the clients. Using this as a test I was able to see download speeds above 25 MB/s for the torrent as a whole, and for a single peer, up to 13 MB/s. Possibly as @ScanFarer stated, this could be worse routing from my ISP to Tzulo, whereas the route from Tzulo to my ISP seems to be fine based on the download speed observed for the Ubuntu torrent.

Thank you, fixed.

These replacement servers are extremely slow and only appear to have only 20% the speed of the previous NYC servers (Haeduis, Ikill, etc). What gives????

There is a misspelling either in the announcement or with the server itself. See below: