SSH3: Faster and rich secure shell using HTTP/3

Post by BobbyTables2 » Sun, Sep 28, 2025, 2:46 AM UTC

bscphil wrote: post #141

arka2147483647 wrote: post #114

Earlier quoted context omitted.

QuickShell - it should be called

QSH?

Post by BobbyTables2 » Sun, Sep 28, 2025, 2:50 AM UTC

_joel wrote: post #180

cozzyd wrote: post #175

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Secure Hypertext Interactive TTY

That sounds a bit crap

Post by ranger_danger » Sun, Sep 28, 2025, 3:04 AM UTC

pdmccormick wrote: post #109

psanford wrote: post #19

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…

HTTPSSH. Why not just SSH/QUIC, what does the HTTP/3 layer add that QUIC doesn’t already have?

Post by eichin » Sun, Sep 28, 2025, 3:10 AM UTC

bcrl wrote: post #39

notepad0x90 wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Although, dollars-to-donuts my bet is that this tool/protocol is much faster than SSH over high-latency links, simply by virtue of using UDP. Not waiting for ack's before sending more data might be a significant boost for things like scp'ing large files from part of the world to the another.

That's why mosh exists, as it is purpose built for terminals over high latency / high packet loss links.

Post by imoverclocked » Sun, Sep 28, 2025, 3:55 AM UTC

throwaway127482 wrote: post #70

zaik wrote: post #62

Earlier quoted context omitted.

HTTPSS for more confusion

SecureHyperTextShell (SHTS) I meant this in jest but now that I think about it, it actually could be a decent name (?)