News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:Mosh: the mobile shell by feld on Tuesday April 26, 2016 @11:47AM (#11572852)
Still no proper IPv6 support. I use v6 almost exclusively to get to all my servers.
Re:Mosh: the mobile shell by secure on Tuesday April 26, 2016 @12:51PM (#11573487)
To be fair, mosh -6 does work. I believe it’s only roaming that doesn’t work yet?
Re:Mosh: the mobile shell by JdeBP on Wednesday April 27, 2016 @01:06PM (#11582292)
Specifically, it is roaming between IPv6 and IPv4 that is problematic. According to Anders Kaseorg, roaming amongst IPv6 nodes works fine.

* https://github.com/mobile-shell/mosh/pull/453

* https://github.com/mobile-shell/mosh/issues/81

Re:Mosh: the mobile shell by feld on Wednesday April 27, 2016 @11:23AM (#11581197)
Right, and without roaming it's kind of pointless.
Re:Mosh: the mobile shell by qwertymaster on Tuesday April 26, 2016 @02:16PM (#11574283)
I wish I had your problems, I've been waiting more than 5 years since my ISP first promised they are working on implementing IPv6 and so far I am still stuck with ~10mbit/s ADSL using IPv4 only.
Re:Mosh: the mobile shell by ash on Tuesday April 26, 2016 @12:23PM (#11573201)
> I use v6 almost exclusively to get to all my servers.

I'm curious. Does any of your servers have only IPv6 address? That is, no IPv4-connectivity.

Re:Mosh: the mobile shell by secure on Tuesday April 26, 2016 @12:51PM (#11573483)
I use mosh to connect to my workstation, which only has an IPv6 address as far as public connectivity goes.

Several friends of mine are in a similar situation, so at least in my bubble, getting easy access to computers running at home is a major use-case for IPv6 :).

Re:Mosh: the mobile shell by feld on Wednesday April 27, 2016 @11:23AM (#11581193)
Some containers/jails do, but not the entire server.
Re:Mosh: the mobile shell by chitta on Tuesday April 26, 2016 @11:49AM (#11572871)
Curious on what advantages you see vs. using IPv6 Edit: IPv4
Re:Mosh: the mobile shell by spdustin on Tuesday April 26, 2016 @12:09PM (#11573051)
I'll chime in and say: Support for IPv6. It's ... self evident? I think we've reached a point that it's okay to call out a network client that doesn't support it.
Re:Mosh: the mobile shell by chitta on Tuesday April 26, 2016 @02:59PM (#11574595)
I am not sure I understand. How is it self-evident? Is there a benefit over using mosh over IPv4? Performance, stability,anything else? Does it add anything to what mosh can do over IPv4. Is the benefit from the client end or the server end or in-between.
Re:Mosh: the mobile shell by DanielDent on Tuesday April 26, 2016 @03:41PM (#11574943)
Well one benefit is that it works. Servers which don't have a v4 address are a thing.
Re:Mosh: the mobile shell by spdustin on Tuesday April 26, 2016 @04:15PM (#11575230)
Connecting to servers that aren't given an IPv4 address (because NAT sucks)?
Re:Mosh: the mobile shell by feld on Wednesday April 27, 2016 @11:22AM (#11581187)
NAT sucks, that's why.