Leaderboard

Chicago servers are consistently reaching their 1 Gbps capacity, frequently throttling connections below 10 Mbps! I think there is a need for an upgrade in the region. Chicago/Midwest region would benefit greatly from a 10 Gbps server. I see several 10 Gbps servers were added in other major cities around the US over the past year or two, but so far haven't seen any in the Midwest (US). I've been exclusively using Chicago servers on AirVPN for several years now. I’ve noticed a decline in reliability over the past six months due to increased user demand and lack of bandwidth capacity. Switching between Chicago servers often yields no improvement. I have tried the nearest 10gbit servers in Toronto, New York and Phoenix, but have had pretty poor results. Most likely due to the fact that they are so far away. Even during non peak times it's very rare there is enough available capacity on these 1gbit Chicago servers to saturate my 500mbps fiber home connection. Would love to know if there are any plans in the near future for upgrading servers in this region. I would also like to mention a post I made over a year ago, where I mentioned how I think adding Per City Load balancing functionality would greatly improve the experience in these congested areas. Even right now as I'm writing this, I am struggling to find a Chicago server running at acceptable speeds. See the below screenshots and you can see for yourself: With VPN on Praecipua server: : Without VPN:

I’d love to see a new 10G server in the Midwest. While it’s not a dealbreaker, it would definitely be a great addition! Edit: One thing I want to point out is that I’ve been testing Mullvad VPN to compare speeds based on server providers. I’ve noticed that certain server providers and may experience poor routing or routing bottlenecks depending on your ISP. For example, the new New York servers on Tzulo (used by both AirVPN and Mullvad) give me terrible results—decent latency but typically only around 40 Mbps symmetrical. Meanwhile, servers from Datapacket and M247 consistently provide over symmetrical gigabit speeds on WireGuard. I think Mullvad's approach of using multiple providers in some cities is a good idea, as it gives users the flexibility to choose servers with the best routing or latency. I don’t know for certain, but AirVPN may have their reasons (costs, contracts, security) for not choosing certain providers, and that’s completely fine. However, I think this is something they could consider if its in the realm of possibility.

Are there any plans to implement proper IP-based load balancing on a per city/data-center basis? Gives a single point of contact on a per-location basis in a way that automatically factors out down servers For physically large countries like US, Canada, DNS-based load balancing by country is far from ideal Better supports home-router connections for whole-home connections to the closest location (and which can't easily fail over if one location's server is down) Supports advanced configurations like policy-based-routing (which need IP addresses) seamlessly Almost any data center will support IP load balancing at the router level, letting you have as many servers as you want behind a single input IP.