go558a83nk

Hello!
 
We inform you the the following servers have been withdrawn:
 
Draco
Reason: datacenter was unable to meet our requirements. This server will not be replaced since we are already operating with an extremely strong presence in Dallas with our own servers and lines and two different top tier2 transit providers.
 
Brachium
Reason: datacenter (Sologigabit) does not want us as customers anymore. Some dizzy and defamatory delirium about illegality of VPN "resellers" [sic] business [sic] was provided as a justification. This server will be replaced by a different server in Spain in a few days. EDIT: Brachium has been replaced by Taurus
 
Kind regards
AirVPN Staff

Regular connections are just as safe.  SSL or SSH are needed to bypass blocks or throttles.
 
It would be interesting for you to try a tls-crypt config on your mobile if you can.  Another person has reported that that bypassed a block.

I live in a country which the government censors the internet. Recently they started blocking all kinds of VPN. None of the AirVPN's UDP/TCP/SSH/SSL protocols works anymore however tls-crypt is working perfectly.

I added an additional feature that allows applications to bypass an existing OpenVPN tunnel. This can be useful if you want to use services that block OpenVPN servers such as Netflix without compromising your other internet traffic. You can easily add applications that you don't want to use the OpenVPN tunnel to Qomui and start them from there. If you are interested how this works have a look at https://serverfault.com/questions/669430/how-to-bypass-openvpn-per-application/761780#761780. Essentially, running an application outside the OpenVPN tunnel works by putting it in a network control group. This allows classifying and identifying network packets from processes in this cgroup in order to route them differently.
 
Have a look at the screenshots to get an idea

Hi,
 
I have written an alternative client for AirVPN that I would like to share with you. Just as Eddie, it supports other providers, too, as long as OpenVPN config files are provided. For AirVPN and Mullvad it offers a convenient update function that just requires you to enter your credentials in order to download the latest server configurations. Furthermore, it allows you to choose among the plethora of protocols offered by AirVPN (including OpenVPN over SSL/SSH) except the experimental ones (I might add support for those in the future, once they become available for all servers).
 
Qomui (Qt OpenVPN management UI) as I have named it, is written in Python and PyQt and should run on any GNU/Linux distribution. It allows you to easily create double-hop connections. In other words, you can route your requests via two OpenVPN servers. This feature works provider-independent. For example, you could choose a Mullvad server for the first hop, and AirVPN for the second (I have successfully tested this with AirVPN, Mullvad and ProtonVPN). Thereby, it avoids a major downside of similar offers by some providers, namely the fact that if one provider controls all "hops" he or she could potentially still see, log or inspect all your traffic. In the latter case, you would gain little in terms of privacy. With the ability to "mix" providers, Qomui does not suffer from the same problem and hence offers some tangible benefits. Obviously, you would still have to sacrifice some speed/bandwith, though.
 
Depending on your DE (looking at you, Gnome!), Qomui will also display a systray icon that shows the country of the server you are currently connected to. Additional features include protection against DNS leaks and a firewall that optionally blocks all outgoing network connections except for the OpenVPN server you have chosen. Since it is never recommended to run graphical applications as root, which is a major flaw of most OpenVPN clients, all commands that require root privileges are handled by a background service that can be controlled via systemd. The following screenshot gives you an idea of what Qomui looks like (on Arch/Arc Dark Theme).
 

 
If you are interested, you can download Qomui from github:  https://github.com/corrad1nho/qomui
 
Of course, I'd be happy for any kind of feedback. If you find bugs or Qomui does not run properly or not at all on your machine, please let me know. I'm happy to help!
 
At last, a big thank you to AirVPN and its amazing community. The fact that you rely more on explaining technical details than empty promises, has helped me to learn a lot. It is also one of the main reason why I chose AirVPN. Commendably, Eddie is also released as open-source software. Only Mullvad does that, too, to my knowledge. Why doesn't every provider do that? You are selling a service, not software! Why would I trust in proprietary software? Funnily, I have never really used Eddie, though, since I was accustomed to manually adding config files to NetworkManager as my first provider did not offer a GNU/Linux client. My interest in features such as OpenVPN over SSL made me look into more convenient solutions, though. Ultimately I decided to write my own program as I wanted to learn some Python and this provided a perfect practical challenge. I have actually used Qomui daily on multiple machines during the past few months and constantly tried to improve it. So I'd thought it'd be about to time to share it (it's an alpha release, though).
 
Have a nice weekend!
 
Corrado

Unfortunately, the issue is still not fixed. I've been trying since noon to get your DNS entry to change - without success.
More information on my recent attempts can be found in the ticket I've created yesterday.
I've screened 4 websites on which I resolved the DNS name and my forwarded ports tab to make sure that the error isn't on my side and to prove that I've been connected for hours without any other connection.
 
I don't know what you changed but something went horribly wrong. A few days ago I was able to connect to private services from other users in the same virtual private network. That's a huge security issue.
Some of these services were clearly not meant for the public.

Hi there,
 
New to AirVPN, I have a question about security. (Sorry if it was answered elsewhere, I couldn’t find it).
 
While testing (on iOS), it seems that everyone connected on the same server is able to see and communicate with each other.
 
In the picture joined to this topic, I’ve launched a scan and a lot of client appeared. Some even have web services open to everyone. The first one I tried should not have been open to the public as it seems that the owner of this computer was not aware that whilst connected to the VPN, its service was on the VPN subnet and not only in his LAN anymore. I’ve stopped there and not checked other client (and won’t do anymore).
 
I was a customer of another VPN provider and it seems that each client was unable to see/communicate with each other. (Their servers were probably configured to disallow that behavior).
 
Please note that I’ve used the config generator and uses OpenVPN Connect on iOS.
 
Is that behavior on AirVPN intended? If so, is there a configuration available in the OpenVPN config file/app to disallow communication with other clients ?
 
Thanks and sorry for my english.
 

False alarm. The daemon that was connecting on that port had apparently died (and since the port check only succeeds if your configured application is using the port, the check failed).

I wrote a quick Lua script that parses the address ranges from ipinfo.io and converts them to OpenVPN routes. Here's a link to the code: http://bit.ly/2Gu8Q2Y
Here's a list of routes that covers all the current Netflix ranges: https://pastebin.com/raw/zRyv6KDj

Hello!
 
DISCLAIMER: this post has been written by an AirVPN co-founder (Paolo) and merges the information and the points of view elaborated by the Air founders in more than seven years. Other Air VPN staff members might add additional comments in the future.
 
We have been asked via Twitter to reply to the following post:
https://gist.github.com/joepie91/5a9909939e6ce7d09e29
 
We see that the issues raised by the aforementioned article may be of general interest, so we have decided to post a detailed rebuttal here, meant to fix the remarkable amount of technical misunderstandings and errors which have led the writer to astonishingly wrong conclusions and worrying generalizations.
 
The rebuttal is based on AirVPN only; we can not and we do not want to write in the name of any other service, since most of the considerations you will read here may or may not (and sometimes we know that they will not) apply to other "VPN services". Anyway, it is our right to reply as if the writer were talking about us too, because he/she repeatedly claims that ALL VPN services act in the same way.

 
 
 
A "VPN in this sense" is NOT a proxy. Our service encrypts and tunnels all of the client system TCP and UDP traffic to and from the VPN server. Moreover, our service, when used with our free and open source software, also makes additional steps to prevent traffic leaks outside the VPN tunnel.
 
A proxy tunnels (and not necessarily encrypts) only TCP traffic (proxies can not support UDP), and only the traffic of those applications which are configured to connect to a proxy. UDP traffic, system traffic and traffic of applications which may be started by the system and that you failed to configure (or that you can't even configure in Windows, in some cases) are not necessarily tunneled to the proxy. Not even your system DNS queries are necessarily tunneled over the proxy.

 
 
If we were really interested in logging our clients traffic, we would not allow connections to and from Tor, proxies and other VPNs. We have always made very clear how to bypass the problem of "trust us" when you can't really afford to do that, and our answer has always been "partition of trust".  Please see for example our post dated March 2012 (!) about it:
https://airvpn.org/topic/54-using-airvpn-over-tor/?do=findComment&comment=1745

 
There's more. We work under a legal framework where the safe harbors for the mere conduits are very rigidly and clearly defined (specifically, by the 2000/31/EC, the E-Commerce Directive, articles 12, 13, 14 and 15).
https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/en/ALL/?uri=CELEX:32000L0031
 
The liability exemption for the mere conduit status would not exist if we were not mere conduits. If we inspected traffic and/or modified traffic (e.g. through content injection) and/or selected source and destination of the communications, we would not be mere conduits and we would lose the legal protection on liability exemptions.

We have also two decisions of the Court of Justice of the European Union which clearly define indiscriminate data retention as infringing the fundamental rights of the citizens of the EU:
https://curia.europa.eu/jcms/upload/docs/application/pdf/2014-04/cp140054en.pdf
https://curia.europa.eu/jcms/upload/docs/application/pdf/2016-12/cp160145en.pdf
 
Therefore:
under a legal point of view, logging and/or monitoring and/or inspecting and/or modifying the content of our customers traffic without the customers explicit and written consent would be a criminal infringement, also subject to civil prosecution by the customers themselves under a business point of view, that would be simply suicidal (more on this later)  
 
It is enigmatic how the writer can make such claims.
 
We charge less than 10 USD per month for our services and we can pay a whole legal firm, 250 servers (physical, bare metal servers), the whole staff, including a tiny team of programmers. We also regularly donate money to organizations and projects whose activities are compatible with AirVPN mission.
https://airvpn.org/mission
https://airvpn.org/status
 
We're not here only for the money, but if the writer wants to talk about money, so be it. He/she may rest assured that we have planned seriously a business model which remains robust if not rock solid.
 
It is obvious that we must keep our business model solid, because our infrastructure has become large and we have duties toward the people working with us and toward our customers. At the same time we never forget that our customers have transformed into reality the dream to build a rather big project based on and aimed to privacy protection in a time when the whole world was going to the opposite direction. By changing now direction and pointing to a business based on privacy infringements and personal data commerce would not only betray our beliefs and mission and customers, but we would become a goldfish in an ocean of sharks, we could not even think to compete.
 
After 7 years, we have the right and knowledge to claim that a privacy protection mission is not incompatible with the price the writer mentions and with a strictly agnostic network where no traffic inspection or monitoring is enforced.
 
We can also claim confidently that any business plan based on data protection and privacy infringements not declared in the terms of service would crash dramatically in the short-term in the EU: remember the legal framework we live in and feel free to do your own research on real cases and incidents in the recent past.
 
Last but not least, please do your own math and compute the costs to store and "hand a customer traffic data over": they imply costs of losing the mere conduit status, added to the costs of civil lawsuits from that and potentially other tens of thousands customers. Then compare them to the "costs" (in reality benefits) of no monitoring at all added to the peace of mind to strictly act in a legal/lawful way.
 
Given all of the above, you can easily discern that the quoted assumption is false for AirVPN. The logical, unavoidable conclusion is that AirVPN best interest, even under a purely cynical, business point of view, is to NOT log (in the most extensive sense of the term) customers traffic and not commerce with their data.
 
 
This is partially, only partially, true. HideMyAss was really risking to go out of serious privacy protection business soon after the incident occurred: check the massive uproar caused by the event. The AVG acquisition, with the disruptive marketing power of AVG, has probably covered the issue, but the old HideMyAss management hurried to sell the whole Privax company. Who knows, maybe just in time, maybe before the value could be hit too seriously by the incident. We can't know for sure, and the writer can't as well. Anyway, if the writer wants to claim that marketing is powerful, we agree (what a discovery!).
 
The logical jump from HMA incident to the assumption that every service does what HMA did is long. Do not forget that what HMA did would pose a huge amount of legal problems to us, as explained.
 
HideMyAss targeted the same persons who are happily using the new Facebook VPN. We respect the intelligence of our customers and we don't have the arrogance to think that we can change people mind and competence all over the world in a few years (or ever), and we don't even think that we can oppose the marketing power. More importantly, that's a problem pertaining to HideMyAss. It is not only unfair, but even defamatory to surreptitiously imply that the behavior (good or bad) of certain services is the same behavior of any other service, in the same field or not.
 
We have been providing AirVPN services since 2011, when we offered the service as a beta version totally free. Now we challenge the writer of the article to provide any single proof that any single user identity has been compromised by us through a betrayal of our terms of service and our mission and/or through traffic logging or inspection and/or by any infringement of the EU legal framework on privacy and personal data protection. 
 
 
False. We provide our users with any tool to never make their "real" IP address appear to our servers. We have also integrated AirVPN over HTTP proxy, AirVPN over SOCKS proxy, and AirVPN over Tor usage in our free and open source software. We don't even block connections from competitor VPN servers. Finally, we accept not only Bitcoin, but Monero and ZCash as well, which are designed to provide a robust anonymity layer on the transactions.
 
If you really don't trust us, you can easily make your IP address never visible to our servers.
 
This is particularly important even if you trust us, but you can't afford (for the sensitivity of the data you need to transmit, for example) to assume that our servers are not monitored by hostile entities, an event that can happen with ANY service, not only VPN services. The fact that we have made every human effort to provide effective and easily usable protections against such occurrences is a proof of our interest in the protection of our customers privacy.

 
 
This is ambiguous, because we would need the writer to define security scope and context exactly. Is he/she referring to integrity and security of data between your node and our servers? Or security of your system? Surely, our service is not meant as a security tool to protect against virus and spyware, and this is clearly stated at the very beginning of our Terms of Service. AirVPN can't do anything if your system is compromised.
 
However, the above does not imply in any way that our service is a glorified proxy. See the reasons we mentioned above and verify how a loose security mention does not change anything. Additionally, while OpenVPN is the core of our service, it is complemented by an important series of features aimed to protect privacy and data in all of those cases which OpenVPN alone has not been designed for.
 
Even if you don't run our free and open source software, we and our community have made any effort to provide guides and insights on how to get the most from our service to integrate it in a comprehensive environment aimed to protect your data and identity. We are very grateful to our community for the invaluable contributions throughout the years.
 
If we were a "malicious VPN provider", does the writer really think that we would have allowed our forums to become a golden source of information for privacy, identity and data protection? Do you really think that we would have been provided monetary support to TorProject, OpenBSD, European Digital Rights, Tor infrastructure, etc. etc.?

 
 
A part of this has been widely rebutted in our previous reply. Here it will be sufficient to add that even if you don't use end-to-end encryption, even if you don't use Tor on top of an AirVPN connection, a MITM who sniffs the packets in any point between the VPN server and the final destination (including the final destination itself of course) will see those packets coming from the VPN server exit-IP address, NOT from your real IP address and NOT from the entry-IP address of the VPN server you connect to. This is a paramount point which is incompetently (intentionally?) ignored by the writer. It is so important that in some extreme cases it makes the difference between imprisonment and freedom, or even between life and death.
 
Imagine the case of a whistleblower giving out relevant information via VoIP or other applications relying on UDP to a self proclaimed journalist who then betrays the confidentiality of the source, or even to a serious journalist who is unaware of the fact that his/her computer is compromised, or that his/her line is wiretapped. The whistleblower can't use a proxy reliably. The journalist, or the wiretapping entity, can trace the source IP address and the identity of the whistleblower can be disclosed (just to make a trivial example which does not require any wiretapping or compromised system, think of Skype exploit, for which any party could discover the IP address of the other party). In most of these cases, end-to-end encryption would have been irrelevant for the whistleblower.
 
Whenever the source can't trust the destination integrity, whether the recipient is in good faith or not, our service makes a vital difference.

 
 
True. We have never said or written the contrary. In addition to changing IP address, which is anyway important in spite of the writer claims, further steps are strictly necessary to prevent profiling, from "separation of identities" to script blocking, from browser fingerprint changes to system settings obfuscation. Our community has widely covered this issue and provided precious suggestions.
 
Here the writer makes a totally irrational shift: first he/she wants to make you think that our service is just a "glorified proxy", then he/she wants to insinuate that our service is useless because it is not some sort of supernatural system capable to protect users from their own behavior and from every possible tracking system which exploits the user system, not the service.


 
 
The first case is true, and it is very important.
 
However, it is totally false that you can safely rely on a proxy for the second case purpose. Many applications, including torrent software, can:
bind to the physical network interface, or do some dangerous UPnP use UDP (not supported by a proxy) send DNS queries out of the proxy include the assigned "real" IP address inside their layer of communications, example: https://blog.torproject.org/bittorrent-over-tor-isnt-good-idea In the aforementioned cases, correct usage of our service will fulfill the purpose to never disclose your real IP address and/or the UDP traffic and/or the DNS queries. A proxy will not and you can be potentially tracked back, either by copyright trolls or any hostile entity.
 
Additionally, our service has many more use cases:
tunneling UDP traffic (not available with a proxy or Tor) circumventing censorship based on IP addresses block circumventing censorship based on DNS poisoning preventing injection of forged packets (not necessarily available with a proxy even in TCP, and surely not when you need UDP flow integrity) using Tor anyway when Tor usage is blocked or triggers interest of ISP or any hostile entity about you protecting your identity when the final recipient of your communications is compromised (not available with end-to-end encryption alone, and not available with Tor when you need UDP, imagine if you need to stream a video in real time which requires source identity protection) making your services (web sites, torrent clients, FTP servers for example) reachable from the Internet when your ISP does not allow port forwarding (not available with a proxy), without exposing your IP address having a static exit-IP address bypassing various types of traffic shaping tunneling simultaneously the traffic of all the devices in your local network, even with remote port forwarding, and even those which can't run OpenVPN provided that you have a device acting as a gateway to the VPN (typical examples a pfSense box or a DD-WRT / AsusWRT / Merlin / Tomato etc. router or any computer configured to work as a router) and maybe you can see more use cases which we have missed here.
 
The fact that the writer omitted all of the above says a lot about his/her competence and/or good faith.

 
 
This is hilarious, and not only because the whole point of the writer's post ends up into advertising LowEndBox.
 
We will not insult our readers' intelligence with an explanation of why that is a terrible idea when you seek more privacy and some anonymity layer in your interactions with the Internet.
 
Draw your own conclusions.
 
Kind regards and datalove
Paolo
AirVPN co-founder

Hello!
 
We're very glad and proud to announce that from now on we are able to accept Bitcoin directly. Any intermediary acting as a payment processor is no more required.
 
We feel that  this is an important step, since some payment processors have taken or are taking steps which are not totally privacy friendly. Moreover, cutting out any intermediary is very coherent with Bitcoin spirit and unleashes the potential of the cryptocurrency.
 
Kind regards and datalove
AirVPN Staff

If you read this, can you please let us know whether you're still using AirVPN?
I'd use your referral when I need to resub, but only if you're still using it.
 
Thanks!

I just wish to reiterate for the second time, I had asked 3 different staff members whether the aforementioned company used pfs outside their app, all of them said no. I just asked another giant VPN provider (censored), not ExperssVPN, very mountain like vpn, if they used perfect forward secrecy on Reddit, they replied "No. You need to download the root.der certificate, install that CA and then setup an IKEV2 VPN connection in the OS. Strongswan on Linux or through network manager in windows. OpenVPN and the app use normal VPN standards, 256 bit encryption and RSA2048."

A few months ago i realized that torrenting with your isp ip is not a very good idea, so i read some stuff about vpn. Compared vpn providers and started a trial with one of the big well known providers, Easy to setup, good price, decent speeds and good support..i thought. Lots of positive reviews, must be good. So i tried it for a week. Many many servers in every part of the world..but only a few usable for p2p. Hmm well who cares, as long they are fast. But it turned out that around 40megabit was the maximum and there are no alternative ports to chose from besides the standard port. So i asked them for support, tips and tricks to get higher speeds. I was told that i should reinstall the client, and otherwise it would be my isp that is capping some ports. I stopped the trial and started looking for another provider. Someone at a techforum told me i should try a 3 days air-trial for an euro. Well why not?
 
So in installed the client , was happily surprised that i could choose the port and protocol i want to use, did some speedtesting, tried some torrents and bam! >225 megabit. So it was possible. Time to get a low-energy consuming torrentpc. Connected both the torrentpc and the desktop to a router that i configured for openvpn. Hmm 10 megabit, something must go wrong. I read some fora and learned that vpnspeed is all about cpu-power and you need some decent single core perfomance, so it`s better to turn a pc into a router/firewall and connect your lan trough that tunnel.
So i bought some new fanless mini itx hardware and an Intel dual nic and installed Pfsense, read lots of guides and how-to`s, encountered lots of problems, got some help on the airvpnforum and after a few days - connected! I`m totally noob with networkingstuff, so if i can get it working with some help and reading, i`m sure everyone can. My pfsense computer is even behind a non-bridged isp modemrouter but that seems no real problem. I can forward ports for torrents in pfsense and it works. Also have a gigabit wireless router behind the pfsense-box so my phone etc, is now behind the vpn as well.
 
Hardware:
Intel® Celeron® CPU J3355 @ 2.00GHz
Current: 2000 MHz, Max: 2001 MHz
2 CPUs: 1 package(s) x 2 core(s)
ES-CBC,AES-XTS,AES-GCM,AES-ICM
Memory usage 5% of 3715 MiB
 
Speed:
ISP: max 250mbit
Most speedtests give 200+ while connected trough vpn
Real life test: See screenshot below. Normally somewhere between 20 and 29 megabyte/s if some well seeded torrents are running. Cpu at pfsense box does 60~65% then.
 
Thanks AIR

I tried pfsense a few weeks ago, and i`m a total noob with networking and firewall stuff. Bought some hardware for a mini-itx system, an Intel dual nic card and it took many days of reading and trying to get it working. But now it works like i wanted (that`s almost 30MB/s trough vpn for the whole lan), without fans or moving parts so it`s totally silent, small and low-energy consuming.

Hello!
 
OpenVPN over SSL works just fine and you don't need anything else.
 
However, we're also interested in trying to bypass some blocks in UDP, where UDP is not blocked globally, or in TCP without the aid of an additional TLS tunnel.
 
For such purpose tls-crypt might help. It is now available in Chara and Castor, and will be deployed onto most or all servers in a month or so. We would be glad to receive feedbacks (not here, only in private tickets) from China or Iran. Please run Eddie 2.14 to support the new feature or re-generate properly the configuration files to test. UPDATE: tls-crypt is now available on all servers, please see next messages in this thread.
 
Kind regards

you must be new to VPN.  errors within the several geolocation databases companies like speedtest use are so common.  and it takes time for a change to propagate. 
 
the server really is in Chicago no matter where speedtest says it is.

Some people run an openvpn client on their router, etc.  In that case, ports do need to be opened on the router.  But, not using the usual port forward which goes from WAN to LAN but with iptables so you can specify TUN to LAN.
 
When running Eddie on a PC the encrypted tunnel goes from your PC to the VPN server.  Your router only sees the 1 connection your PC and the VPN server communicate on.  Everything happens inside that 1 encrypted connection.  Thus it's called "tunnel".  So, please understand that your router isn't even capable of selectively allowing connections to be established from "outside" through that VPN tunnel because it doesn't even see all the connections happening inside that tunnel.
 
Anyway, port forwarding is working for thousands of people as I write this.  If it were not so we'd see a LOT more posts about it.

Does any traffic flow to/from utorrent even if port forwarding isn't working?  Or is it completely not working?  You didn't happen to mess with proxy settings or something?
 
It's probably time to switch to qbittorrent anyway, considering the fact that utorrent is in big trouble for a security vulnerability.
 
Qbittorrent can be bound to the TAP adapter which is another level of security as you don't have to worry about it trying to make connections outside the VPN tunnel.

All proper guides on this site say you DO NOT forward ports on your router if you are using AirVPN Eddie on your PC.

On top of all the good arguments already brought on, we would like to add that in Dallas we have a better protection against © trolls and other entities. Any VPN service operating servers in the United States must take into account the cowardliness of datacenter owners who prefer to just shut lines and services than analyzing claims from copyright industry and other entities.
 
Actually, check our competitors: you will see that even giants like Private Internet Access do not have the guts to allow (just to make an example) p2p protocols in the United States (they re-route outside the USA).
 
Or think of NordVPN which does not allow p2p at all in servers in the USA, in spite of their promises of Net Neutrality, no traffic discrimination, no traffic monitoring etc.
 
They do monitor and discriminate traffic to re-route your p2p traffic outside the USA, or to block it altogether. They re-route or ban an entire class of protocols because through a couple of them copyright infringements might be easier.
 
At the end of the day, please evaluate all the services we provide and all the promises we keep. You will get an explanation about why we focus on carefully picked locations to host our servers instead of basing our business on marketing fluff aimed to gullible people.
 
Kind regards

I'm getting speeds of over 160-180mbps right now.
I got up to 350mbps on occasion, which is near the max of what my internet line is ( 400mbps )
 
(Server name censored for privacy reasons)

I guess all those people getting great speeds as seen on the status page don't matter.  You're the proof that AirVPN is slow.

This might help. It explains the reason Texas is a major data center state in the USA. Texas enacted House Bills to provide data centers with major tax exemptions. PDF is attached for convenience.
 
Frisco Texas site: friscoedc.com
 
Site PDF: http://friscoedc.com/sites/default/files/files/SelectUSA-Investors/snapshots_datacenters.pdf
 
snapshots_datacenters.pdf

1) It's just best to pick a server that works well for you and stick to it, using IP address, not a name.
 
2) What you're using for DNS servers are not DNS servers.  That's why your name resolution isn't working.
 
3) If you're not using merlin asus (https://asuswrt.lostrealm.ca/) already I strongly recommend that you do.  You'll have much more control over your openvpn client on the router, including the ability to do policy routing.  It also gives you a choice on how to handle DNS - you can force the use of AirVPN DNS resolver when the tunnel is up or you can disable DNS switching and continue to use the DNS resolver of your choice when the tunnel is up.  The best mix of security, privacy, and ease is to just force the use of AirVPN DNS resolver.