I wouldn't call it a replacement, as it uses ssh for authentication and strives to not reinvent the wheel there. That is actually what makes mosh so nice - if you have your hosts in .ssh/config and your public key installed to your hosts, you can use mosh instead of ssh in interactive sessions and It Just Works. You still have ssh for file transfer, TCP and X11 forwarding, etc.
For telecommuting, it's really nice to have mosh handle handovers between wifi and 3g/4g networks so gracefully. And for high latency links, it makes the user experience a bit less annoying.
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.
Unfortunately the one iOS app that supports mosh (iSSH) was removed from the app store late last year. I've heard that the mosh license isn't compatible with the App Store(?)
The Mosh license has been compatible with the App Store since October 2012. Nobody has done the port yet (which will probably require grafting on a GUI terminal emulator), but I'm hoping somebody will do it if the demand is really there.
Mosh is nice, but I always feel wary about opening a big port range for it. Had it on my todo list for ages to work out a way of temporarily opening the port range for an IP that makes a successful SSH login.
FWIW, it works well with a fairly typical "allow all out, deny all in" firewall configuration. That is what I have set up on my server, and it works fine.
If you go the deny all out, yeah, you'll probably have to set up more specific outgoing exceptions for Mosh.
Gets stuck at "Connecting..." when I try it on any of my servers with the default firewall config (allow all out, allow related/established in, allow new to 22).
This looks cool on the surface but I'm not sure how to feel about it; do I really want to add another layer on top of SSH without worrying about security leaks?
While I'm sure it can be done right I will probably reserve judgment until I have time to thouroughly check this out. The pros aren't many but I do like the thought of roaming connections. That and the local edit, echo, delete looks like it would help with editing (vim/gvim) over some lagging connections I sometimes get.
Definitely something to keep an eye on though, nice write up too.
What amazes me about mosh is how it handles transitions in and out of the private wifi network at my school. When I want to ssh to school machines from off campus, I generally need to use a VPN. Without the VPN the machines are unreachable: if I ping them, no packets are returned; ssh attempts fail. Using mosh, though, I've found that I can start a session at school and resume it off campus, no VPN necessary. This seems like magic to me. Can anyone explain how mosh does this?
Luckily Mosh isn't a real replacement. The first what comes in my mind wars "All the crypto rewritten?" and then I read "Uses SSH for Auth" ...
SSH is robust and wide used ... I want no replacement for ssh because it seems like solid crypto.
But mosh seems interesting.
Biggest drawback is that none of the commercial clients will implement support for it, that's what killed it for me (SecureCRT developer VanDyk told my company NOPE!) due to license issues :(
Yeah, what's the point of creating a great, mobile focused alternative (or enhancement, however you'd like to describe it) to SSH if no one will implement it on iOS because it's GPLv3?
If a company want to create a proprietary client, they can always do that. They simply has to pay programmers to do the work, rather then freeload on the work of a research university.
Alternative they could collaborate with the research community, adding to the common knowledge in computer science and security on a deal where everyone share in access. For security and encryption software, I find this deal to be quite necessary for everyone involved and are thus glad with projects license choice.
This is NOT native scrolling. You still have to manually toggle "scroll-mode", get janky lag because of the screen redraws, and a redundant "selection cursor" that messes with inversions of the scroll direction.
Just been using this for the last week or so. It's great, especially for trains (intermittent connections) and geographically far-away servers (high-latency connections).
It does offer persistent sessions. However, the other nice part of Mosh is how it handles low-quality connections. I can use vim over SSH pretty nicely over 3G or crappy conference WiFi thanks to it.
Mosh and screen/tmux serve different roles. Mosh keeps your connection and reconnects across all sorts of events that would break your ssh connection. (laptop sleeps, different networks). Then screen/tmux manages the sessions on the other side of that connection.
Maybe I don't understand everything screen can do, which is very possible.
Previous discussions:
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=8252093
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=5016745
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=3819382
Did anyone else see this file about how a guy used mosh to escape from an elevator? http://gopher.floodgap.com/gopher/gw.lite?gopher://sdf.org:7...
I wouldn't call it a replacement, as it uses ssh for authentication and strives to not reinvent the wheel there. That is actually what makes mosh so nice - if you have your hosts in .ssh/config and your public key installed to your hosts, you can use mosh instead of ssh in interactive sessions and It Just Works. You still have ssh for file transfer, TCP and X11 forwarding, etc.
For telecommuting, it's really nice to have mosh handle handovers between wifi and 3g/4g networks so gracefully. And for high latency links, it makes the user experience a bit less annoying.
edit: missing word added
Is this auto submitted every 6mo? Because that's what it's looking like.
There is no changes from the past 3 submissions...
If I had to guess, I'd say this got posted because of the relevance next to the other posts about multiplexing SSH/HTTP over a single connection.
Doesn't support the following:
The x-forwarding is what kills me. Still waiting for it though.
Does it support any sort of port forwarding, not just X11?
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.
No, MOSH is purely for interactive terminals.
JuiceSSH (probably the most popular Android SSH client) supports mosh fully.
I've being using Mosh for some time now. I really like it that apps like JuicySSH also support is so when my server goes down I can fix it on the go.
Unfortunately the one iOS app that supports mosh (iSSH) was removed from the app store late last year. I've heard that the mosh license isn't compatible with the App Store(?)
The Mosh license has been compatible with the App Store since October 2012. Nobody has done the port yet (which will probably require grafting on a GUI terminal emulator), but I'm hoping somebody will do it if the demand is really there.
That's not entirely true:
https://github.com/keithw/mosh/issues/198#issuecomment-74179...
Panic has explicitly stated in the past that they won't add mosh support to Prompt due to license issues, for instance.
Mosh is nice, but I always feel wary about opening a big port range for it. Had it on my todo list for ages to work out a way of temporarily opening the port range for an IP that makes a successful SSH login.
FWIW, it works well with a fairly typical "allow all out, deny all in" firewall configuration. That is what I have set up on my server, and it works fine.
If you go the deny all out, yeah, you'll probably have to set up more specific outgoing exceptions for Mosh.
That's surprising, as IIRC it needs inbound UDP on high ports which aren't directly associated with the inbound TCP for the SSH session.
It does; they are likely opened up via hole punching, coordinated via the SSH connection.
Gets stuck at "Connecting..." when I try it on any of my servers with the default firewall config (allow all out, allow related/established in, allow new to 22).
You can open a single UDP port and specify the port number using the -p option when connecting.
If you're worried about opening ports, you're doing security wrong.
Very funn-
...oh, you're serious?
/facedesk
This looks cool on the surface but I'm not sure how to feel about it; do I really want to add another layer on top of SSH without worrying about security leaks?
While I'm sure it can be done right I will probably reserve judgment until I have time to thouroughly check this out. The pros aren't many but I do like the thought of roaming connections. That and the local edit, echo, delete looks like it would help with editing (vim/gvim) over some lagging connections I sometimes get.
Definitely something to keep an eye on though, nice write up too.
What amazes me about mosh is how it handles transitions in and out of the private wifi network at my school. When I want to ssh to school machines from off campus, I generally need to use a VPN. Without the VPN the machines are unreachable: if I ping them, no packets are returned; ssh attempts fail. Using mosh, though, I've found that I can start a session at school and resume it off campus, no VPN necessary. This seems like magic to me. Can anyone explain how mosh does this?
Uses udp and probably udp is not filtered in the firewall
"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?
Abstraction. It's its own transport, but needs SSH to establish the session.
Luckily Mosh isn't a real replacement. The first what comes in my mind wars "All the crypto rewritten?" and then I read "Uses SSH for Auth" ... SSH is robust and wide used ... I want no replacement for ssh because it seems like solid crypto. But mosh seems interesting.
Biggest drawback is that none of the commercial clients will implement support for it, that's what killed it for me (SecureCRT developer VanDyk told my company NOPE!) due to license issues :(
Using proprietary software for security is a no-go.
Yeah, what's the point of creating a great, mobile focused alternative (or enhancement, however you'd like to describe it) to SSH if no one will implement it on iOS because it's GPLv3?
If a company want to create a proprietary client, they can always do that. They simply has to pay programmers to do the work, rather then freeload on the work of a research university.
Alternative they could collaborate with the research community, adding to the common knowledge in computer science and security on a deal where everyone share in access. For security and encryption software, I find this deal to be quite necessary for everyone involved and are thus glad with projects license choice.
I like mosh but you can't scroll back in it. That's not nice.
Use tmux.
That still doesn't give you native scrolling.
It can do if you configure it to
its not really "native" scrolling. (technically, it is, but obviously the commenter meant to have regular scrollback maintained client-side)
Then again the situation is no better with ssh, and tmux/screen work okay for that.
You can get native tmux scrolling on a mac with iTerm or Terminal.app: https://filippo.io/native-scrolling-and-iterm2/
This is NOT native scrolling. You still have to manually toggle "scroll-mode", get janky lag because of the screen redraws, and a redundant "selection cursor" that messes with inversions of the scroll direction.
Just been using this for the last week or so. It's great, especially for trains (intermittent connections) and geographically far-away servers (high-latency connections).
Screen (terminal program) already offers most of those features.
It does offer persistent sessions. However, the other nice part of Mosh is how it handles low-quality connections. I can use vim over SSH pretty nicely over 3G or crappy conference WiFi thanks to it.
Mosh and screen/tmux serve different roles. Mosh keeps your connection and reconnects across all sorts of events that would break your ssh connection. (laptop sleeps, different networks). Then screen/tmux manages the sessions on the other side of that connection.
Maybe I don't understand everything screen can do, which is very possible.
Anyone know when Mosh will support IPv6?
looks like it does. Check out the github mosh issues on ipv6.