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

Iroh 1.0

iroh.computer

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

131–140 of 488 posts

Re: Iroh 1.0

#131

Post by w4der »

serf wrote: post #44
j4cobgarby wrote: post #2

Doesn't it seem odd to have "Pricing" for a protocol that's meant to serve a similar function to IP addresses? Maybe I'm misunderstanding something.

tailscale syndrome. "we want to be infrastructure for people, and a business towards professionals." stuck between "we need cash to operate" and "we want to be a public good infrastructural system." , with the negative parts of a for-profit whisked away with "Well it's open source." it's a business concept i'm okayish with as long as the "Well it's open source." caveat doesn't come with a total bespoke and unusable c…

RustDesk has a similar business model and works fine for what it is, is there something particular about TailScale and Iroh that makes you think it will not work?

Re: Iroh 1.0

#133

Post by nicebyte »

I am confused why this is needed.

> IP addresses can break, without warning, and it's outside of your device's control.

We have DNS?

> Keys, however, are created & controlled by you. They stay the same as your device moves, and are yours to throw away, or not.

So are domain names? This page does not do a good job of helping me find what it is that I'm missing.

Re: Iroh 1.0

#134

Post by larodi »

rklaehn wrote: post #16

I am one of the iroh developers. A question that frequently comes up: when will iroh support webrtc, or BLE, or LoRa, or ... Iroh as of now supports only IPv4, IPv6 and relay transports out of the box. There is such a large variety of potentially interesting transports out there that we can't support all of them without turning the codebase into an unmaintainable maze of feature flags. But we have added the ability t…

Lora is a must

Re: Iroh 1.0

#135

Post by dignifiedquire »

colinmarc wrote: post #92

We use Iroh in production at work, and I'm absolutely in love with it. I'd describe it primarily as "Tailscale-style hole punching as a rust crate", but of course you can sprinkle a lot of cool p2p stuff on top of the basic QUIC connections.

thank you!

Re: Iroh 1.0

#136

Post by ben-schaaf »

kkapelon wrote: post #99
moritzruth wrote: post #97

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Those are intended to solve the problem at the OS layer, while Iroh (being a library) does it at the application layer.

Like https://tailscale.com/docs/features/tsnet ?

From reading that, it lets you establish connections within your tailscale vpn. Iroh let's you establish connections between devices regardless of their network.

Re: Iroh 1.0

#137

Post by arilotter »

My company was using Iroh for a production distributed ML training system & we LOVED it. The team was incredibly responsive even before we hooked up with an enterprise support contract, they're incredibly knowledgeable and the library itself worked amazingly. ++ to this lib. would use again over libp2p anytime.

Re: Iroh 1.0

#138

Post by dignifiedquire »

forsalebypwner wrote: post #59
AgharaShyam wrote: post #56

LM studio recently released a mobile app powered by Tailscale -- https://lmstudio.ai/link . Iroh seems like a perfect OSS alternative for implementing similar p2p features.

Tailscale is OSS AFAIK. Not their backend of course, but if you use Headscale then I believe every part is OSS.

tailscale also is written in go, making the integration on mobile especially, often times a lot harder and more expensive

Re: Iroh 1.0

#139

Post by Arqu »

system2 wrote: post #101
rklaehn wrote: post #62

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Iroh is QUIC. We are not trying to reinvent the wheel here, just combining existing IETF RFCs in a creative way. Here is a concrete problem we solve. You have one device in your home WLAN behind a NAT. Your other device is in a 4g network, or behind another NAT at work. In most cases we can give you a direct connection between the two devices very quickly via hole punching, so you get the highest possible bandwidth a…

Is bypassing the router a good idea?

Yes if you want to. Routers are a necessary abstraction from the IPv4 days and seems it will stick around for a long time, and we need solutions sometimes around those topologies.

Re: Iroh 1.0

#140

Post by kkapelon »

danudey wrote: post #123
kkapelon wrote: post #84

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Already possible with taiscale, netmaker, zerotier etc. https://tailscale.com/blog/how-nat-traversal-works

But only for devices already on that tailnet. This allows you to provide information to an arbitrary person (a friend/coworker/etc) to let them access the thing without them having to jump through all the extra hoops of joining your tailnet/them joining yours/adding a VPN/etc.

but what exactly is the use case? I was responding to the nat traversal topic..

If I wanted to share something internal with a friend I would use ngrok or any of the million alternatives.

Anyway, this is exactly why my top-level comment says that this project needs a "versus" page in the docs.

Post reply on HN