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

211–220 of 488 posts

Re: Iroh 1.0

#211

Post by kbenson »

9dev wrote: post #192
ben-schaaf wrote: post #136

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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

There might be a misunderstanding of what Tailscale offers here. There is no "VPN" in the classic "virtual network" way. With Tailscale, you can - as with Iroh, IIUC - connect arbitrary nodes to each other, where a node can be a device or an application (via tsnet). All nodes get CGNAT IPs and an addressable hostname, so there is one giant "network" of all your nodes with automatic DNS resolution baked in.

Doesn't tailscale require those all be administered and approved by one account?

> there is one giant "network" of all your nodes

From what I understand they're saying, the point is that you get easy connections to things that aren't "your" nodes, sort of like allowing me to connect one of my tailscale nodes ad-hoc to one of your tailscale nodes, when our accounts are not related in any way prior to us doing that, and without me having to allow your node onto my network or you allow one of mine onto your network and have to deal with the specialized ACLs for that, since it's just a direct connection between two nodes.

Re: Iroh 1.0

#212

Post by teravor »

rklaehn wrote: post #189
teravor wrote: post #179

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Tor https://github.com/n0-computer/iroh-tor-transport you are using a Tor daemon in it. tor has a rust implementation and when used with rust has stream objects etc. an example of how it's used can be found in https://gitlab.torproject.org/tpo/core/oniux

Yes, I wrote the current tor transport as a quick demo/testground for custom transports. Arguably directly embedding the rust tor implementation would be more useful for the typical iroh user that wants an embeddable library. I just did not get to it yet. But thanks for the link.

turns out someone made an issue about it, and they referenced a more relevant example: https://github.com/uncognic/circuitchat

Re: Iroh 1.0

#213

Post by rklaehn »

opem wrote: post #188
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…

Can the relay servers, when used as fallback, read the data between two parties by providing its own public key to both of the peers?

No. The data in each direction is encrypted by TLS, using ephemeral keys.

Only the owner of the corresponding private key can initiate a connection from their public key, or receive a connection attempt to their public key.

Let's say you have alice and bob talking via a relay. Even if you have the private key of alice, you can impersonate alice to bob, but not vice versa. So you can't initiate a connection between the two.

To really intercept data you would need the private keys of both participants.

Re: Iroh 1.0

#214

Post by bel8 »

dignifiedquire wrote: post #78
bel8 wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As I see, it tries to explain. But as someone who's not a network specialist, I fail to see how this is not a glorified P2P DNS. Maybe this example helps: https://github.com/n0-computer/iroh#rust-library const ALPN: &[u8] = b"iroh-example/echo/0"; let endpoint = Endpoint::bind().await?; // Open a connection to the accepting endpoint let conn = endpoint.connect(addr, ALPN).await?; // Open a bidirectional QUIC stream l…

I would love to see that P2P DNS you are talking about

Perhaps it doesn't exist because there's no real need.

Re: Iroh 1.0

#215

Post by 9dev »

kbenson wrote: post #211
9dev wrote: post #192

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There might be a misunderstanding of what Tailscale offers here. There is no "VPN" in the classic "virtual network" way. With Tailscale, you can - as with Iroh, IIUC - connect arbitrary nodes to each other, where a node can be a device or an application (via tsnet). All nodes get CGNAT IPs and an addressable hostname, so there is one giant "network" of all your nodes with automatic DNS resolution baked in.

Doesn't tailscale require those all be administered and approved by one account? > there is one giant "network" of all your nodes From what I understand they're saying, the point is that you get easy connections to things that aren't "your" nodes, sort of like allowing me to connect one of my tailscale nodes ad-hoc to one of your tailscale nodes, when our accounts are not related in any way prior to us doing that, an…

Yeah, I figured that in the mean time. It just didn’t occur to me because my use case is literally the opposite—having a secure company network where strict ACLs are the core value, not a nuisance. But if easy ad-hoc connections are your goal, Iroh sure looks like the better choice then.

Re: Iroh 1.0

#217

Post by nunobrito »

Sean-Der wrote: post #204
opem wrote: post #200

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So iroh is basically WebRTC, except it works in and outside of a browser. Relays seems quite similar to TURN/STUN servers except they also handle fallback traffic much like TOR guard/relay nodes

Does WebRTC not work inside/outside of the browser anywhere?

It works outside the browser too, I've been using it that way.

Re: Iroh 1.0

#218

Post by guywithahat »

nicebyte wrote: post #133

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.

What you're missing is that they can't charge you for IP's, and someone else already charges you for DNS/domains. They would like to replace your IP's with keys they lookup. It's a cool idea and I would expect that they'll find a market, but I'm not sure this would be a breakthrough product for me

Re: Iroh 1.0

#220

Post by nunobrito »

jhbruhn wrote: post #88

That to me looks like Reticulums [1] adressing ("Destinations") with transport done via QUIC. Does it add anything what Reticulum didn't already solve, other than using slightly different protocols - do they have an advantage? [1] https://reticulum.network/

Or I2P that even comes with reinforced privacy: https://i2p.net/en/
Post reply on HN