5 ms·

If you want SSH via UDP, try mosh. If you have it installed on both client and server side, it just works, re-using auth, sessions etc fron ssh itself and only

If you want SSH via UDP, try mosh. If you have it installed on both client and server side, it just works, re-using auth, sessions etc fron ssh itself and only replacing sending actual session bytes back and forth. Don't break on unstable connections, have way lower latency

georgyo 3y ago
Mosh and this project have fairly different goals. Mosh uses regular TCP SSHv2 to authenticate and setup the udp connection. As such your initial connection time is actually slower than just normal v2, and you cannot auth with something like oauth. Mosh is heavily focused on interactive sessions. You could not use mosh for batch programs easily.
- gabeio 3y ago
  > Mosh is heavily focused on interactive sessions. You could not use mosh for batch programs easily. Correct, the goals are better human interaction with a high delay internet or server. Effectively allowing the client side to guess a bit as to where your input went (it does decently at it). But the key thing that I've loved is even if my client machine goes to sleep and I go to a different building I'm still connected to the server. That is wonderful. Agreed the connection time is slower. Mosh = Mobile shell.
v3ss0n 3y ago
eternal is better than mosh https://eternalterminal.dev/ https://eternalterminal.dev/
- binkHN 3y ago
  Neat. > While mosh provides the same core functionality as ET, it does not support native scrolling nor tmux control mode (tmux -CC).
- ckwalsh 3y ago
  Do you happen to know where I can read about how ET and Mosh each establish their connections? I have used Mosh for years and recently heard of ET, but when I tried it I experienced noticeable hangs that I don’t get with Mosh, and I went back. I heard from several people that “ET is the new Mosh”, but it won’t be for me unless I can figure out/resolve those hangs
- password4321 3y ago
  I would probably choose between the two based mostly on their security track record, but I haven't needed the comparison yet.
- chungy 3y ago
  "ET uses TCP" Right there, Eternal doesn't even try to cover the same use case as Mosh. It might be an alternative, same way regular SSH is an alternative, but there's no way it can be "better"
deleted 3y ago
[deleted]

georgyo 3y ago

Mosh and this project have fairly different goals. Mosh uses regular TCP SSHv2 to authenticate and setup the udp connection. As such your initial connection time is actually slower than just normal v2, and you cannot auth with something like oauth. Mosh is heavily focused on interactive sessions. You could not use mosh for batch programs easily.

gabeio 3y ago
> Mosh is heavily focused on interactive sessions. You could not use mosh for batch programs easily. Correct, the goals are better human interaction with a high delay internet or server. Effectively allowing the client side to guess a bit as to where your input went (it does decently at it). But the key thing that I've loved is even if my client machine goes to sleep and I go to a different building I'm still connected to the server. That is wonderful. Agreed the connection time is slower. Mosh = Mobile shell.

v3ss0n 3y ago

eternal is better than mosh https://eternalterminal.dev/ https://eternalterminal.dev/

binkHN 3y ago
Neat. > While mosh provides the same core functionality as ET, it does not support native scrolling nor tmux control mode (tmux -CC).
ckwalsh 3y ago
Do you happen to know where I can read about how ET and Mosh each establish their connections? I have used Mosh for years and recently heard of ET, but when I tried it I experienced noticeable hangs that I don’t get with Mosh, and I went back. I heard from several people that “ET is the new Mosh”, but it won’t be for me unless I can figure out/resolve those hangs
password4321 3y ago
I would probably choose between the two based mostly on their security track record, but I haven't needed the comparison yet.
chungy 3y ago
"ET uses TCP" Right there, Eternal doesn't even try to cover the same use case as Mosh. It might be an alternative, same way regular SSH is an alternative, but there's no way it can be "better"

deleted 3y ago

[deleted]