Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Show HN: Mole – an open source tool to easily create ssh tunnels

davrodpin.github.io

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 61 posts

Re: Show HN: Mole – an open source tool to easily create ssh tunnels

#21

Post by dspillett »

satiani wrote: post #15
8fingerlouie wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

session resumption: tmux a As for predictive character insertion, when i'm working in a shell, especially with high latency, i prefer my commands to be as i type them, not something some algorithm "guessed" i was going to type.

That's not what mosh is, it doesn't predict what you're going to type. It however proactively renders the characters you type before it receives confirmation from the tty on the other end. In other words, imagine typing ssh somebox.typo.com and waiting 1 second before the text renders and discovering the typo, then pressing backspace, waiting a while for the backspaces to render, then going through all of this again.…

> It however proactively renders the characters you type before it receives confirmation from the tty on the other end.

Basically for those with experience of text terminals genrally: local echo.

Re: Show HN: Mole – an open source tool to easily create ssh tunnels

#22

Post by lkuty »

maeln wrote: post #17
8fingerlouie wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

session resumption: tmux a As for predictive character insertion, when i'm working in a shell, especially with high latency, i prefer my commands to be as i type them, not something some algorithm "guessed" i was going to type.

Mosh support roaming and intermittent connectivity which is really super useful if you have to debug a server on a very dodgy 3g connection in a moving train.

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

Re: Show HN: Mole – an open source tool to easily create ssh tunnels

#23

Post by 8fingerlouie »

dspillett wrote: post #21
satiani wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's not what mosh is, it doesn't predict what you're going to type. It however proactively renders the characters you type before it receives confirmation from the tty on the other end. In other words, imagine typing ssh somebox.typo.com and waiting 1 second before the text renders and discovering the typo, then pressing backspace, waiting a while for the backspaces to render, then going through all of this again.…

> It however proactively renders the characters you type before it receives confirmation from the tty on the other end. Basically for those with experience of text terminals genrally: local echo.

I worked as a sysadm at at "large" (local scale) UNIX SysV installation back in the early 90s.

Everything there connected via serial ports, remote offices got multiplexed over a 9600 baud connection. Back then we had local echo for the sometimes slow link, i.e. printing a spreadsheet converted to 3Mb PostScript, and still only 9600 baud in total.

So i know what local echo is. It has nothing to do with prediction :)

I'm still not convinced about mosh, but it sounds like it really does help a lot of people, so who am i to judge. I guess i'm privileged since i don't usually experience latency. We have about 95% 4G coverage in this country, coupled with fiber connections.

The last time i experienced any noticeable latency was when editing files on a clients SCO OpenServer across The Atlantic Ocean over a 1200 baud connection.

Re: Show HN: Mole – an open source tool to easily create ssh tunnels

#24

Post by jpitz »

8fingerlouie wrote: post #23
dspillett wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> It however proactively renders the characters you type before it receives confirmation from the tty on the other end. Basically for those with experience of text terminals genrally: local echo.

I worked as a sysadm at at "large" (local scale) UNIX SysV installation back in the early 90s. Everything there connected via serial ports, remote offices got multiplexed over a 9600 baud connection. Back then we had local echo for the sometimes slow link, i.e. printing a spreadsheet converted to 3Mb PostScript, and still only 9600 baud in total. So i know what local echo is. It has nothing to do with prediction :) I…

For me, the advantage of mosh is that it handles network changes seamlessly.

Re: Show HN: Mole – an open source tool to easily create ssh tunnels

#25

Post by dest »

8fingerlouie wrote: post #11
dest wrote: post #4

Very nice. I'd consider pinging the guys of OpenBSD to suggest upstreaming this interesting, user friendly, syntax into SSH itself.

is the ssh syntax for doing the same thing really that bad ? I find it easy to remember, it's just one flag (-L) with local_port:remote_ip:remote_port to forward local port 3306 to mysqlhost:3306: ssh -L 3306:mysqlhost:3306 The strength of using ssh is that you can forward multiple ports with the same connection. i.e. ssh -L 3306:mysqlhost:3306 -L 8080:webhost:80

If it's easy for you to remember ssh syntax, then for you ssh is the better tool. As far as I'm concerned, I never remember the different syntax between -L, -R, -D, etc. Always have to read a doc somewhere.

In the same topic, do you remember the syntax of tar? I don't. https://www.xkcd.com/1168/

Re: Show HN: Mole – an open source tool to easily create ssh tunnels

#26

Post by satiani »

8fingerlouie wrote: post #23
dspillett wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> It however proactively renders the characters you type before it receives confirmation from the tty on the other end. Basically for those with experience of text terminals genrally: local echo.

I worked as a sysadm at at "large" (local scale) UNIX SysV installation back in the early 90s. Everything there connected via serial ports, remote offices got multiplexed over a 9600 baud connection. Back then we had local echo for the sometimes slow link, i.e. printing a spreadsheet converted to 3Mb PostScript, and still only 9600 baud in total. So i know what local echo is. It has nothing to do with prediction :) I…

> So i know what local echo is. It has nothing to do with prediction :)

Not precisely, because you're sometimes predicting whether a keypress should be rendered as a letter on the screen or not (e.g. if you click 'j' in vim command mode it doesn't actually print j). mosh, at least from my experimentation, seems smart enough to do that reliably.

Re: Show HN: Mole – an open source tool to easily create ssh tunnels

#27

Post by tjoff »

kstenerud wrote: post #5

I'm not sure if I missed something? Normally I use -L syntax for tunneling (-L local_port:remote_addr:remote_port). Does this tool do more?

I don't know if it does but I kind of assumed/hoped it did reconnect if a connection drops. But I can't find anything about it so I guess it doesn't.

Re: Show HN: Mole – an open source tool to easily create ssh tunnels

#30

Post by 8fingerlouie »

dest wrote: post #25
8fingerlouie wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

is the ssh syntax for doing the same thing really that bad ? I find it easy to remember, it's just one flag (-L) with local_port:remote_ip:remote_port to forward local port 3306 to mysqlhost:3306: ssh -L 3306:mysqlhost:3306 The strength of using ssh is that you can forward multiple ports with the same connection. i.e. ssh -L 3306:mysqlhost:3306 -L 8080:webhost:80

If it's easy for you to remember ssh syntax, then for you ssh is the better tool. As far as I'm concerned, I never remember the different syntax between -L, -R, -D, etc. Always have to read a doc somewhere. In the same topic, do you remember the syntax of tar? I don't. https://www.xkcd.com/1168/

I use tar daily, so yes, i remember the syntax :)

copy files from a to b:

    (cd /src && tar cf - .) | (cd /dest && tar xf -)
operations are easy :(c)reate, e(x)tract, (t)est options the same: (f)ile, (v)erbose, g(z)ip compression. the only illogical ones is bzip2 compression and xz compression with -j and -J

I think i can remember cpio syntax as well, though i haven't used that i a decade, but did use it quite often in my old sysadm job.

copy files from a to b by piping :

    find /somewhere -print | cpio -o | (cd /destination && cpio -i)
or simply for all you kids:

    find /somewhere -print | cpio -p /destination
Post reply on HN