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

301–310 of 488 posts

Re: Iroh 1.0

#301

Post by samantp »

syllogistic wrote: post #298
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…

> when will iroh support webrtc... This would give you a native iroh node that also speaks webrtc but I find that what folks want is for browsers to participate as peers. I build p2claw, p2p for self-hosted web apps, and ended up doing both halves separately. Box to box is iroh, although I use my own coordinator service and run my own iroh relay. Browser to box is webrtc with a service worker that makes the browser a…

Yes, seems that browser support for services running on P2P boxes behind NATs cannot leverage iroh. Need the service worker hijacking the browser’s fetches as well as monkey patching the browser’s websocket SDK and sending all that traffic over webrtc data channels.

Re: Iroh 1.0

#302

Post by rmunn »

thejazzman wrote: post #287
apitman wrote: post #255

If you're new to Iroh, my mental model is roughly "Tailscale at the application layer instead of the network layer". If your question is, "why not just use Tailscale?", look at it from an app developer's perspective. If you want to release an app and have instances of your app be able to easily connect to each other, you could theoretically embeded Tailscale functionality into your app, but then the users of your app…

also to follow on the "why not use tailscale" should be because they're a business who seeks to make money and we are fools to keep concentrating distributed technology to a handful of centralized owners (!) especially when iroh makes it so easy and awesome to do it right.

So instead of paying a subscription fee to Tailscale to support your distributed application, you pay a subscription fee to Iroh to support your distributed application. (https://www.iroh.computer/pricing says $19/month for what most people will want to use it for).

Either one will allow you to stop "concentrating distributed technology to a handful of centralized owners", but the "why not use tailscale" part of what you're trying to say is not at all evident from your comment.

Re: Iroh 1.0

#303

Post by aag »

For a side project, I used Iroh to give my web server in the cloud the ability to print directly to my label printer at home. The API is simple and easy to use. It took no time to write a reliable system on top of Iroh.

Re: Iroh 1.0

#305

Post by comboy »

bellowsgulch wrote: post #292
dotancohen wrote: post #261

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Dial keys. Not IPs. > It's a simple idea really, and it's the right abstraction for the future of the internet. IP addresses can break, without warning, and it's outside of your device's control. Keys, however, are created & controlled by you. They stay the same as your device moves, and are yours to throw away, or not. IP addresses can be private and inaccessible behind firewalls, but with iroh your device can be…

No idea why this is downvoted, it's exactly the pitch for DNS. Others and I are asking the same question. There's no value proposition here.

Different network layer, no centralization, no authorities, DNS has nothing to do with making p2p connections, it's like the ballpark is not even in the same country

Re: Iroh 1.0

#308

Post by khowells »

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?

As I understand it the “peer ID” you dial acts like the public key, of the public/private key pair. So the public key doesn’t come from the relay. You need to do the initial public key/ID exchange out of band, and then dial the connection to each other via the relay.

So the relay is never in a position to send you the wrong public key, because it doesn’t give it to you in the first place.

Re: Iroh 1.0

#309

Post by khowells »

duped wrote: post #181
shevy-java wrote: post #150

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But what is the actual problem?

Establishing fast/secure P2P connections between computers.

Establishing fast/secure P2P connections between ~computers~ *apps.

If you want to connect 2 computers use Tailscale. If you want to write an app which offers peer to peer connection for some feature, then use iroh.

Re: Iroh 1.0

#310

Post by Bnjoroge »

apitman wrote: post #255

If you're new to Iroh, my mental model is roughly "Tailscale at the application layer instead of the network layer". If your question is, "why not just use Tailscale?", look at it from an app developer's perspective. If you want to release an app and have instances of your app be able to easily connect to each other, you could theoretically embeded Tailscale functionality into your app, but then the users of your app…

They should basically replace any Why Iroh vs Tailscale with this. Thank you
Post reply on HN