EMULE

I see. So AmneziaWG 1.5 has updated the allowed range for parameters. Does that mean Eddie's random parameter generator also needs to limit the parameter range? For example, should we restrict the Jc parameter to be randomly generated within the 0–10 range? Otherwise, if the generated Jc always exceeds 10, it will just be capped at 10, which would defeat the purpose of randomization, right?

Get two more logs. Eddie_1 is a log showing a failed attempt to send a message by clicking the paper airplane icon without connecting to the server. Eddie_2 is my server connection. When I click the paper airplane icon, the connection fails to send, the program crashes and restarts, disconnects, and then I reconnect, only to see the connection failure log displayed. In addition to the system reporting a sending failure, I also discovered a parameter issue in a custom AmneziaWG command. When randomly generating the corresponding AmneziaWG parameters for the WireGuard and AmneziaWG servers, if the Jc parameter generates a value greater than 10, it will become Jc=10 after clicking OK. When randomly generating the corresponding AmneziaWG parameters for the AmneziaWG server, not only the Jc parameter has the above problem, but S1 and S2 also have this problem. Once the randomly generated S1 is greater than 64 and S2 is greater than 64, they will all become S1=64 and S2=64 after being determined. Are there maximum value limits for these parameters? If so, should these parameter values be limited during random generation? However, I can clearly use Jc=20 in the AmneziaWG client on my computer. Is this an Eddie issue? I found that the configuration parameters for the AmneziaWG native server are more complex than those for the WireGuard server, which may be a key factor in my bypassing the GFW? I am looking forward to the arrival of the AmneziaWG native server.😄😄😄 Eddie_1.txt Eddie_2.txt

Hello. It seems you are also living under the firewall. Your logs are the same as WireGuard's logs in China now, and they are identified and blocked by the firewall. Please try the advanced obfuscation options. AirVPN offers: OpenVPN over SSH, SSL, TOR and AmneziaWG. The AmneziaWG option is currently in the testing phase. For detailed usage instructions, please find tutorials on the AirVPN website. If you are using the eddie client on your computer, you can uncheck "Automatic" and select a specific obfuscated protocol in Settings - Protocols.

I can't send a complete system report. Once I click the paper airplane icon, Eddie crashes and restarts, losing all previous reports. The live logs show an error, which I vaguely recall is caused by a connection reset. Even when I'm connected to the AirVPN server, Eddie still crashes and restarts. After some effort, I finally managed to capture the error log. Eddie_日志已创建在_14_Dec_2025_09_12_01_UTC_上.txt

Hello. Today I installed the eddie v4.0.0 beta version on my Android phone and connected to AmneziaWG to perform a speed test. The following file is the log report. I can sense that AmneziaWG seems to have been speed-limited recently; the speed isn't as fast as when I first started using it. With CPS disabled, AmneziaWG was the slowest, with the connection speed limited to about 10KB/s for a short while before rebounding to a maximum of 500KB/s. Enabling CPS and trying QUIC emulation resulted in the fastest speed, reaching approximately 2MB/s. However, the speed was sometimes throttled to 300KB/s and as low as 10KB/s. On my most frequently used servers in Belgium and the United States, Wireguard port 1637 was usually available, whereas previously it was always unavailable on the Belgian server. When attempting DNS emulation, the speed was roughly the same as without CPS enabled. The connection was briefly throttled to 10KB/s, but after waiting, it recovered to 200KB/s, with a maximum speed of about 800KB/s. However, most of the time the speed was slower than AmneziaWG without CPS enabled. The QUIC emulation is currently performing well, and the speed may be even faster once the WireGuard server fully supports AmneziaWG, since it is currently only a test version. I'm confused as to why AmneziaWG is still being throttled. According to AmneziaVPN's advertising, shouldn't the AmneziaWG protocol be unrecognized by DPI? I suspect it's due to ISP generally limiting UDP speeds. Even when I turn off my VPN software and browse websites allowed in China, some content still buffers. However, there is no doubt that the availability of the AmneziaWG protocol is the highest among the protocols currently offered by AirVPN. SSH, SSL and other standard protocols do not perform as well as AmneziaWG in my experience. Although AmneziaWG is speed-limited, I can still browse the web, although download tasks are sometimes fast and sometimes slow. So far, I have not found any issues with AmneziaWG being blocked after the connection is established. After all, this is just a test so far. I'll wait until AmneziaWG is added to the Eddie PC version and then use it for a longer period of time to see how it goes. May everything turn out in a positive direction. Eddie_日志已创建在_14_Dec_2025_07_03_23_UTC_上.txt Eddie_日志已创建在_14_Dec_2025_07_14_52_UTC_上.txt

Okay, so it's an error that the IP address shown in the Eddie logs doesn't change when your computer's MAC address changes. I thought it was a routing problem, but it turns out it's an Eddie issue. I've learned something new.😁😁😁

Okay, I'll listen to you. You're more professional than me.😊😊😊

This is just how eddie works. When you add a server to the allowed list, eddie will only perform latency tests and ratings on servers in the allowed list. Therefore, I use eddie to never add any servers to the allowed list so that eddie can rate all servers. If you want to see the ratings for all servers, please remove all servers from the allowed list.

Is 192.168.254.254 your router's IP address? Is your computer's IP address set to 192.168.254.104? However, the log shows that your computer's IP is 192.168.254.254, which means that your computer's IP is indeed not being routed correctly. Does your router have an IP-MAC binding function in its DHCP settings? If so, it is recommended that you use DHCP to bind the devices you want to use to the local IP address via MAC identifier. If not, you can try assigning the router address to 192.168.254.1, and then assigning other devices to addresses after that (192.168.254.2~192.168.254.254).

This is caused by an incorrect local network IP address. I see from the logs that your computer's local IP address is 192.168.254.254. I would like to ask what the IP address of your router's LAN port is? Home network IP addresses are usually automatically assigned by the router (DHCP). Why would you need to manually assign one? If you absolutely must use a static local IP address, please ensure that the IP is correctly routed. For example, if your router's LAN port IP is 192.168.3.1, then all devices connected to this router must have IP addresses within the corresponding address pool (192.168.3.2~192.168.3.254). Has your computer's IP been correctly routed? Please check carefully.

Yes, if you need help from the community, try to provide logs or screenshots of program malfunctions. Text descriptions alone make it difficult to pinpoint the problem. However, there's another reason: I simply didn't see it. Haha, there are plenty of posts on the community forum after all. 😄😄😄

Have you added a specific server to the allowed list in the server list? You can check the "Show All" box at the bottom of the Eddie server interface to see all servers.

Really? It's good news to know that it's not a server issue.😂 It seems the only option left is to try AmneziaWG 1.5. 😡Damn the GFW! The latest GFW has incorporated AI, greatly enhancing its ability to block VPN protocols. Fortunately, China is vigorously promoting IPv6, which allows me to catch my breath for now. The future depends on full support from the AmneziaWG protocol.🙌

This is a problem. Because it's dynamic. For example, today I can connect to all ports on server A, but only to a specific port on server B. Tomorrow, I might only be able to connect to the specific port on server A, while all ports on server B will be available. All servers behave this way; there's no guarantee that one will always be available and another will always be unavailable. Server hardware and software are fixed, and my network environment is also fixed. Only the server load is dynamic, which is why I suspect it's a problem of Wireguard resources being exhausted on the server. Perhaps OpenVPN is consuming too many resources. I think we can verify this on the two servers testing DCO by increasing the priority of WireGuard and seeing if all WireGuard ports are available.

I'm also confused. Perhaps the hardware isn't powerful enough? A 1Gbps server can handle 100+ users with 80% bandwidth utilization. This means a 10Gbps server would need 1000+ users to achieve the same 80% bandwidth utilization. However, in reality, a 10Gbps server experiences a significant speed drop when handling 300+ users, seemingly unable to keep up. It would be better to label it as a 3Gbps or 5Gbps server, as the actual speed difference from the advertised 10Gbps is substantial. If that's the case, it would be better to replace one 10Gbps server with ten 1Gbps servers. Maybe that's the case? I think AirVPN may have leased a 10Gbps network in the data center, but the servers can't handle that 10Gbps network. Isn't that a waste of resources? I think AirVPN can increase the number of 1Gbps servers as much as possible to make full use of network bandwidth, which would also save on server costs for AirVPN, wouldn't it?