2 ms·
With mosh you can even resume connections after disconnecting but without losing interaction with the target machine as it happens under SSH. Also, it will use
by anthk 3y ago
With mosh you can even resume connections after disconnecting but without losing interaction with the target machine as it happens under SSH. Also, it will use far less bandwidth. I tried it with 2G/ISDN-DSL like speeds and it worked great. And you can keep using tmux just in case.
On the "caveats", you need UTF8 support in the client machine, but today that's granted.
- cozzyd 3y agoI'm sure there are some advantages, but I couldn't quickly figure out how to get it running with the various jump hosts required (and I also often use port forwarding...). Just having tmux on the other side gets me most of the advantages, I think...
- anthk 3y agoWell, on port fwd, maybe if you forward the mosh server port would work. If you use SSH itself as a tunnel, the setup it's far complex, as mosh is just a remote shell. Still, mosh curb-stomps ssh on latency, input guesssing, data saving and bandwith usage. Using that over 2G was a literal black/white difference compared to SSH which was nearly impossible to connect and the latency was unbearable. Under mosh I could chat, email, nntp (they still are some good newsgroups), IM over jabber/telegram, read news over RSS, code in C/TCL (jimsh) and read the docs with links, among reading books (novels and essays) with some CLI epub reading script. Yes, I also used tmux on the remote machine too, mosh+tmux work great with each other. Albeit mosh resumes a potentially lost/dropped connection just fine (even without a running remote tmux/screen), I think tmux itself would send less data over the wire.