[QUOTE=lycorn;369226]Just out of curiosity, what´s your motivation for those assignments in particular?[/QUOTE]

The general idea among a substantial amount of participants is that a factor is worth more than two matching LL tests. The range 0 to 10M is substantially better trial factored than the higher ranges. In the many graphs you can find a significant dip from 10M to a few million higher. I noticed some GPU owners are doing trial factoring in that range. So P-1 in that area would contribute.

So I started at [URL="http://www.mersenne.ca/p1small.php?prob=3&min=11000000&max=11100000&onlystage1=1&ignorenop1=1&showassigned=0"]this page of the mersenne site of James[/URL] and work from there on. Work is not coordinated, so use the LMH subforum to claim your non server assigned work.

Yeah, got your idea. Actually, I´ve also been bit by the "finding factors for small DCed exponents" bug. I´ll probably carry on for some more time performing ECM/TF/P-1 on small exponents.
But I didn´t understand what you said about 0-10M range being "better trial factored" than subsequent ranges. In fact, the average bit level for that range is way lower than 10-20M (which is no surprise, given the significantly higher difficulty of digging deeper in the 0-10M than in the 10-20M).
Or are you already takimg this into account when you say it´s "better TFed"?