News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:Mosh: A replacement for SSH by quotemstr on Monday September 01, 2014 @05:40AM (#8252148)
I feel like mosh is fixing problems at the wrong layer. Instead of making application protocols connectioness, we should make Mobile IP work so that connections don't need to be broken in the first place, or, failing that, separate the protocol management from the session persistence system.

Combining regular ssh with screen has worked fine for me for years. Why would I want to switch to something with a much shorter track record for security?

(By the way: if you want a line-buffered ssh for use over bad connections, run ssh inside Emacs with M-x shell.)

Re:Mosh: A replacement for SSH by rakoo on Monday September 01, 2014 @08:02AM (#8252441)
> we should make Mobile IP work

Unfortunately we have very little chance of having an impact on how ip is implemented in mobile network, but we do have the possibility to change our softwares to accommodate deficiencies. Much like HTTP over SPDY is highly similar to HTTP over SCTP, but we have much more chance in making SPDY a reality rather than SCTP.

> Combining regular ssh with screen has worked fine for me for years.

I guess the real novelty (and it's too bad it isn't presented in greater depths) is SSP, the synchronization protocol. It can be an inspiration for other network programs.

Re:Mosh: A replacement for SSH by therealmarv on Monday September 01, 2014 @06:27AM (#8252247)
Thank you for the tip with "screen"! I was aware of MOSH but did not know about screen oO. Is there any other line-buffered ssh which does not require Emacs?
Re:Mosh: A replacement for SSH by nolok on Monday September 01, 2014 @07:34AM (#8252385)
If you do not know screen, then tmux is going to blow your mind
Re:Mosh: A replacement for SSH by matthiasv on Monday September 01, 2014 @08:19AM (#8252484)
If you do know screen, then tmux is going to blow your mind.
Re:Mosh: A replacement for SSH by jnbiche on Monday September 01, 2014 @08:46AM (#8252561)
Well, this is probably as good a place as any to ask a tough TMUX question I've had for several years. I love TMUX, but whenever I'm working with protocols or anything binary, if I accidentally push any binary out of stdout, it corrupts the display, and the only way I've figured out how to fix this once it's happened is to totally restart TMUX.

Does anyone know how to fix this?

(don't usually ask SO questions on HN but this has been bugging me for years)

Re:Mosh: A replacement for SSH by jdelStrother on Monday September 01, 2014 @11:57AM (#8253459)
'reset' might work, but often when this happens to me, it's because the window's name has been changed to something ridiculous. Hit "<prefix>," and rename your window back to something sensible.
Re:Mosh: A replacement for SSH by jnbiche on Monday September 01, 2014 @10:26PM (#8255540)
'reset' combined with renaming the window may just work. Thanks for everyone's input!
Re:Mosh: A replacement for SSH by fmoralesc on Monday September 01, 2014 @09:23AM (#8252669)
Tried 'reset'?
Re:Mosh: A replacement for SSH by marcosdumay on Monday September 01, 2014 @09:12AM (#8252637)
I have very litle experience with TMUX... But you can try runnng the "reset" command. It resets the TTY, if TMUX does not use any crazy magic it should work.
Re:Mosh: A replacement for SSH by cel1ne on Monday September 01, 2014 @09:44AM (#8252764)
lesspipe [0] might fix your problem to some part.

[0] http://www-zeuthen.desy.de/~friebel/unix/lesspipe.html

Re:Mosh: A replacement for SSH by JoshTheGeek on Monday September 01, 2014 @12:32PM (#8253642)
Kill the pane (prefix x) and then run `reset`, maybe?
Re:Mosh: A replacement for SSH by rezacks on Monday September 01, 2014 @09:56AM (#8252809)
tmux is awesome indeed!
Re:Mosh: A replacement for SSH by Ecio78 on Monday September 01, 2014 @07:46AM (#8252409)
Check also tmux as screen alternative
Re:Mosh: A replacement for SSH by morsch on Monday September 01, 2014 @06:21AM (#8252231)
Yes. I was wondering, faced with an unreliable on-train mobile connection, is there any existing way to improve the content delivery by using a proxy host?

It seemed to me as if the mobile browser kept redoing a whole lot of work, ie. essentially re-requesting web sites from scratch. I'd like to make a single request to a web site, have my proxy host complete the request and deliver the bytes piecemeal to the browser as I go in and out of range.

I think it's possible to do this transparently to the browser, but I think you might need a proxy host with a reliable connection as well as a proxy software running on the mobile device that can deal with the situation by telling the reliable host: I'm back, here's a list of running requests and the last byte I received, please continue.

Re:Mosh: A replacement for SSH by rakoo on Monday September 01, 2014 @12:44PM (#8253703)
He was mocked, but he was anticipating it: Stallman sends an email to a daemon that fetches the pages for him (https://stallman.org/stallman-computing.html)

> I generally do not connect to web sites from my own machine, aside from a few sites I have some special relationship with. I fetch web pages from other sites by sending mail to a program (see git://git.gnu.org/womb/hacks.git) that fetches them, much like wget, and then mails them back to me. Then I look at them using a web browser, unless it is easy to see the text in the HTML page directly.

Re:Mosh: A replacement for SSH by kyrra on Monday September 01, 2014 @07:13AM (#8252341)
I believe this is how the opera browser for ios works, or amazons browser for their fire tablet.
Re:Mosh: A replacement for SSH by Piskvorrr on Monday September 01, 2014 @08:47AM (#8252562)
Alas, both of them are proprietary and monolithic - IOW, you can only use the infrastructure iff you're also using the one specific client. Not very useful for extending even for other browsers, or even different protocols - which is a pity :(
Re:Mosh: A replacement for SSH by jdong on Monday September 01, 2014 @01:44PM (#8253943)
Lynx over mosh?
Re:Mosh: A replacement for SSH by boomlinde on Monday September 01, 2014 @11:40AM (#8253357)
> we should make Mobile IP work so that connections don't need to be broken in the first place

A lot of the problems with mobile networking are the results of connections literally being cut off. On trains I often end up without coverage (tunnels, in the middle of nowhere) exactly for that reason; the connection broke. I don't think that hacking a system based on connections to pretend that this never happens is a particularly good idea.

Re:Mosh: A replacement for SSH by takeda on Monday September 01, 2014 @08:19PM (#8255186)
There are already some solutions for this (and other problems). For example [NDN](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Named_data_networking) which was designed based on today's Internet usage pattern.

The major problem with it is that existing protocols need to be reinvented once again to fit new way of communicating. Of course you could encapsulate TCP/IP over it, but then you're losing all nice properties of the protocol.

Re:Mosh: A replacement for SSH by e40 on Monday September 01, 2014 @10:32AM (#8253004)
Combining regular ssh with screen has worked fine for me for years.

This doesn't work for me because I use emacs over X11 over a tunnel.

mosh doesn't work because I feel required to use ssh-agent. That is, I feel required to use a password on my ssh private key and not using ssh-agent is too high a burden.

Re:Mosh: A replacement for SSH by fahadkhan on Monday September 01, 2014 @11:36AM (#8253340)
Have you tried xpra?
Re:Mosh: A replacement for SSH by gglitch on Tuesday September 02, 2014 @11:09AM (#8257976)
I run ssh inside emacs, and I also leave emacs running in server mode on my targets. I drop my signal, no big deal; I reconnect and reattach to emacs. No fuss, no muss, no lost work. It then becomes immense that I can do almost everything in emacs :)
Re:Mosh: A replacement for SSH by sandstrom on Monday September 01, 2014 @10:34AM (#8253016)
Although I like mosh, I agree that fixing this at a lower level would be better.

What do you think about Multi-path? I think Apple is already using it for Siri.

http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc6824.html

Re:Mosh: A replacement for SSH by rweir on Monday September 01, 2014 @06:24AM (#8252240)
> I feel like mosh is fixing problems at the wrong layer. Instead of making application protocols connectioness, we should make Mobile IP work

I look forward to using regular SSH to connect to my servers hosted in the floating city of New Chicago!

Re:Mosh: A replacement for SSH by quotemstr on Monday September 01, 2014 @08:36AM (#8252530)
I'm still optimistic that we'll support RFC 6275 before we're all dead.
Re:Mosh: A replacement for SSH by Piskvorrr on Monday September 01, 2014 @08:48AM (#8252564)
I for one hope that I won't need to support it after I'm dead.
Re:Mosh: A replacement for SSH by anonbanker on Wednesday September 03, 2014 @12:13PM (#8263704)
Let's assume for a moment that RFC6725 is implemented in pacemakers or artificial organs. How long after death would/should these devices remain active? could we use Mobile ipv6 to communicate with the recently-departed loved ones to send final well-wishes?
Re:Mosh: A replacement for SSH by Piskvorrr on Thursday September 04, 2014 @04:55AM (#8267275)
Let us assume the moon is made of cheese. Now let's discuss the feasibility of a cheese-mining colony there.

I, for one, look forward to communicating with a deceased person's gallbladder.

Re:Mosh: A replacement for SSH by anonbanker on Thursday September 04, 2014 @05:07AM (#8267297)
https://warosu.org/data/vr/img/0014/96/1395782839524.jpg

Perhaps replying with a non-sequitor is why you were downvoted?

Re:Mosh: A replacement for SSH by Piskvorrr on Wednesday September 10, 2014 @05:49AM (#8295759)
In other words, perhaps more seriously: If your initial assumption doesn't make sense, then the whole argument is nonsensical.
Re:Mosh: A replacement for SSH by anonbanker on Wednesday September 10, 2014 @12:45PM (#8297464)
Maybe you can explain why implementing RFC6725 in pacemakers and other artificial organs doesn't make sense?
Re:Mosh: A replacement for SSH by Spooky23 on Monday September 01, 2014 @09:32AM (#8252716)
It's not going to happen, especially in mobile.

ISPs like Verizon Mobile are NATing everything -- even IPv6 IPs, and running through proxy servers to enable rate-limiting and other things.

Re:Mosh: A replacement for SSH by quotemstr on Monday September 01, 2014 @10:46AM (#8253079)
There is no reason that traffic shaping should require NAT.
Re:Mosh: A replacement for SSH by andreasvc on Monday September 01, 2014 @12:04PM (#8253489)
"One IP per customer" makes accounting and bandwidth capping much easier.
Re:Mosh: A replacement for SSH by simoncion on Monday September 01, 2014 @01:20PM (#8253852)
"One IPv6 /64 per customer" works just as well, no?
Re:Mosh: A replacement for SSH by teddyh on Monday September 01, 2014 @07:41AM (#8252395)
(If all you’re using M-x shell for is to run SSH, it makes more sense to run M-x eshell, since that doesn’t waste a process for a subshell.)