Hacker Read top | best | new | newcomments | leaders | about | bookmarklet login

mosh? It's a replacement for interactive ssh.


sort by: page size:

Mosh is a client/server setup allowing kind of asynchronous interactive session on a ssh server over a ssh connection. It doesn't replace ssh but complements it, making ssh interactive sessions more usable for low-latency and failing connections.

It somehow works like a proxy, with the added feature that it tries to add some sort of advanced local echo.


How is mosh in there? Mosh is something to make ssh more reliable, how would that be a trend?

ssh, mosh

Mosh isn't a replacement for SSH, it uses it.

> The mosh client logs in to the server via SSH

This is a cool list overall though.


Mosh is nice, but "A replacement for SSH" is quite stretching it, considering it does use ssh to setup its own connection and so it depends on SSH.

It also doesn't provide most of SSH functionality, and it doesn't support IPv6 yet, whereas SSH does.


Mosh is great, seriously. It just works, of course not nearly as battle tested as SSH but it practically works very well.

I used it alot when I ran an irc client (I use IRCCloud now).


It's not a SSH replacement - X (and port and agent) forwarding or file transfer are different features. Mosh is a remote terminal client (and an absolutely brilliant one!), whereas SSH has a lot of different applications besides this one.

The neat thing about mosh is that it doesn't rely on ssh. All you need is a way to launch a process on a remote machine and securely transmit a shared key back to the client. ssh happens to be a useful way to do this, but it's not required

I like Mosh, but it's one of those programs that's "insufficiently better" for me to use, especially since it doesn't implement all the features of ssh.

Have you tried SSH over Mosh? (or rather, mosh over ssh)

> Mosh is a replacement for SSH. It's more robust and responsive,

> Mosh doesn't listen on network ports or authenticate users. The mosh client logs in to the server via SSH

Umm..

> Unlike SSH, mosh's UDP-based protocol handles packet loss gracefully

So it's not a replacement for SSH, but instead sits on top. Not only that, but it has some separate self-designed protocol that it uses to implement its ju-ju, presumably heavily peer reviewed for security design defects considering the claims of being an SSH replacement that are being made. :)


It's a replacement in the sense that, whenever you'd type 'ssh', you should type 'mosh' instead.

So mosh built into ssh? Count me in, since I've never been able to get mosh running due to locale issues.

I was really impressed with mosh when I used it a few years ago. In this case SSH is going 20ft or so over ethernet, so the aspects that mosh pushes hasn't been necessary.

I just learned about mosh, ty. I use SSH sessions all the time and sometimes over satellite links.

Somewhat relevant: I think Mosh solves a few problems that SSH lacks. This article: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=8252093 made it on Hacker News a bit ago. The video is wort the watch imo.

mosh is nice, but I don't feel like installing a not well established ssh server replacement on hosts at work.

Mosh is great, but I kind of stopped using it once I discovered Tmux so I could resume a session if the connection dropped.

It's not that Mosh does anything wrong, but SSH has more features, and is supported by basically everything ever. Consequently, I stick with old-school SSH.


"Mosh is a replacement for SSH". "The mosh client logs in to the server via SSH..." Huh? I'm confused. So is it a replacement or is it an abstraction?
next

Legal | privacy