I do hate the name ssh3. I was glad to see this at the top of the repo: > SSH3 is probably going to change its name. It is still the SSH Connection Protocol (RFC4254) running on top of HTTP/3 Extended connect, but the required changes are heavy and too distant from the philosophy of popular SSH implementations to be considered for integration. The specification draft has already been renamed ("Remote Terminals over H…
SSH over QUIC so, maybe SSHoQ or SoQ soq reads better for the CLI I suppose.
I don't know why it makes me a little sad that every application layer protocol is being absorbed into http.
This is actually good because every protocol ideally must look the same to make traffic shaping and censorship harder. Either random stream of bytes or HTTP.
If you are designing a protocol, unless you have a secret deal with telcos, I suggest you masquerade it as something like HTTP so that it is more difficult to slow down your traffic.
I don't know why it makes me a little sad that every application layer protocol is being absorbed into http.
Yeah we got those good old network ppl or their corporate (don't knows much about tech) overlord to thank for that. If you ever using wifi in the airport or even some hotel with work suite unit around the world, you will notice that Apple Mail can't send or receive emails. It is probably some company wide policy to first block port 25 (that is even the case with some hosting providers) all in the name of fighting SPA…
Having all protocol look the same makes traffic shaping harder. If you develop a new protocol, do not make your protocol stand out, you won't win anything from it. Ideally all protocols should look like stream of random bytes without any distinctive features.
> the keystroke latency during a session remains unchanged That’s a shame. Lowered latency (and persistent sessions, so you don’t pay the connection cost each time) are the best things about Mosh ( https://mosh.org/ ).
Lowered perceived latency.
Mosh uses UDP in addition to optimistic updates, so there is an actual latency improvement.
It's on top of HTTP CONNECT, which is intended for converting an existing request (QUIC stream) into a transparent byte stream. This removes the need to deal with request/response semantics. The reasons states to use http3 and not QUIC directly makes sense with littlest downside - you can run it behind any standard http3 reverse proxy, under some subdomain or path of your choosing, without standing out to port scanne…
Google Cloud’s identity aware proxy underpinning the gcloud compute ssh command works the same way, as an http CONNECT upgrade.
It also gives you two authenticated protocol layers, which helps them because most standard protocols don’t support multiple authenticated identities. Their zero trust model uses it to authenticate each time you make a connection that your machine has authorization to connect to that endpoint via a client certificate, and then the next protocol layer authenticates the user.
I don't know why it makes me a little sad that every application layer protocol is being absorbed into http.
This is actually good because every protocol ideally must look the same to make traffic shaping and censorship harder. Either random stream of bytes or HTTP. If you are designing a protocol, unless you have a secret deal with telcos, I suggest you masquerade it as something like HTTP so that it is more difficult to slow down your traffic.
It's been known they throttle HTTP too.
So your super speedy HTTP SSH connection then ends up being slower than if you just used ssh. Especially if your http traffic looks rogue.
At least when its its own protocol you can come up with strategies to work around the censorship.
I do hate the name ssh3. I was glad to see this at the top of the repo: > SSH3 is probably going to change its name. It is still the SSH Connection Protocol (RFC4254) running on top of HTTP/3 Extended connect, but the required changes are heavy and too distant from the philosophy of popular SSH implementations to be considered for integration. The specification draft has already been renamed ("Remote Terminals over H…
SSH/HTTP/3 That way, when you need to use sed for editing text containing it, your pattern can be more interesting: sed 's/SSH\/HTTP\/3/SSH over HTTP\/3/g'
I do hate the name ssh3. I was glad to see this at the top of the repo: > SSH3 is probably going to change its name. It is still the SSH Connection Protocol (RFC4254) running on top of HTTP/3 Extended connect, but the required changes are heavy and too distant from the philosophy of popular SSH implementations to be considered for integration. The specification draft has already been renamed ("Remote Terminals over H…
SSH2/3, maybe?
It's still largely SSH2, but runs on top of HTTP/3.
I do hate the name ssh3. I was glad to see this at the top of the repo: > SSH3 is probably going to change its name. It is still the SSH Connection Protocol (RFC4254) running on top of HTTP/3 Extended connect, but the required changes are heavy and too distant from the philosophy of popular SSH implementations to be considered for integration. The specification draft has already been renamed ("Remote Terminals over H…
/* This is one proper bikeshedding thread if I ever saw one. */